1: %% The command below calls the preprint style
2: %% which will produce a one-column, single-spaced document.
3: %%
4: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
5: %\usepackage{lscape}
6:
7: %% manuscript produces a one-column, double-spaced document:
8:
9: %\documentclass[manuscript]{aastex}
10:
11: %% preprint2 produces a double-column, single-spaced document:
12:
13: %% \documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
14:
15: %% Sometimes a paper's abstract is too long to fit on the
16: %% title page in preprint2 mode. When that is the case,
17: %% use the longabstract style option.
18:
19: %% \documentclass[preprint2,longabstract]{aastex}
20:
21: %% You can insert a short comment on the title page using the command below.
22:
23: \slugcomment{Resubmitted to ApJS}
24:
25: %% If you wish, you may supply running head information,
26:
27: \shorttitle{Warm Gas in Luminous Infrared Galaxies}
28: \shortauthors{Wilson et al.}
29:
30: \begin{document}
31:
32: %% you may use \\ to force a line break
33:
34: \title{Luminous Infrared Galaxies with the Submillimeter Array: \\ I. Survey Overview and the Central Gas to Dust Ratio}
35:
36:
37: \author{Christine D. Wilson\altaffilmark{1,2},
38: Glen R. Petitpas\altaffilmark{2}, Daisuke Iono\altaffilmark{3,2},
39: Andrew J. Baker\altaffilmark{4},
40: % add ALMA for Alison?
41: Alison B. Peck\altaffilmark{2,12}, Melanie Krips\altaffilmark{2},
42: Bradley Warren\altaffilmark{1},
43: Jennifer Golding\altaffilmark{1}, Adam Atkinson\altaffilmark{1},
44: % below here are people who just commented on drafts
45: Lee Armus\altaffilmark{11}, T. J. Cox\altaffilmark{2},
46: Paul Ho\altaffilmark{9,2}, Mika
47: Juvela\altaffilmark{10}, Satoki Matsushita\altaffilmark{9},
48: J. Christopher Mihos\altaffilmark{8}, Ylva Pihlstrom\altaffilmark{7},
49: Min S. Yun\altaffilmark{6}
50: }
51:
52: \altaffiltext{1}{Department of Physics \& Astronomy, McMaster University,
53: Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4M1 Canada; wilson@physics.mcmaster.ca,
54: bwarren@physics.mcmaster.ca, goldingj@physics.mcmaster.ca, atkinsa@muss.cis.mcmaster.ca}
55: \altaffiltext{2}{Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics,
56: Cambridge, MA 02138; gpetitpa@cfa.harvard.edu,
57: mkrips@cfa.harvard.edu, tcox@cfa.harvard.edu}
58: %\altaffiltext{2}{Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, 645 N. A'Ohoku Place,
59: %Hilo, HI 96720 U.S.A.}
60: \altaffiltext{3}{National Astronomical Observatory of Japan, 2-21-1
61: Osawa, Mitaka, Tokyo 181-0015, Japan; d.iono@nao.ac.jp}
62: \altaffiltext{4}{Department of Physics and Astronomy,
63: Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey,
64: 136 Frelinghuysen Road,
65: Piscataway, NJ 08854-8019 U.S.A.;
66: ajbaker@physics.rutgers.edu
67: }
68: \altaffiltext{6}{Department of Astronomy, University of Massachusetts,
69: Amherst, MA 01003;myun@astro.umass.edu}
70: \altaffiltext{7}{Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of
71: New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131; ylva@unm.edu}
72: \altaffiltext{8}{Department of Astronomy, Case Western Reserve
73: University, 10900 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44106; mihos@case.edu}
74: \altaffiltext{9}{Academia Sinica Institute of Astronomy and
75: Astrophysics, Taipei 106, Taiwan;
76: pho@asiaa.sinica.edu.tw, satoki@asiaa.sinica.edu.tw}
77: \altaffiltext{10}{University of Helsinki Observatory, Finland; mika.juvela@helsinki.fi}
78: \altaffiltext{11}{Spitzer Science Center, California Institute of
79: Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125; lee@ipac.caltech.edu}
80: \altaffiltext{12}{Joint ALMA Office, Avda El Golf 40, piso 18,
81: Santiago, Chile 7550108; apeck@alma.cl}
82:
83:
84: \begin{abstract}
85: We present
86: new data obtained with the Submillimeter Array
87: for a sample of fourteen nearby luminous and ultraluminous infrared
88: galaxies. The galaxies were
89: selected to have distances $D_L < 200$ Mpc and
90: far-infrared luminosities $\log L_{\rm FIR} > 11.4$.
91: The galaxies were observed with spatial resolutions of order 1 kpc
92: in the CO J=3-2, CO J=2-1, $^{13}$CO J=2-1,
93: and HCO$^+$ J=4-3 lines as well as the continuum at
94: 880 $\mu$m and 1.3 mm.
95: We have combined our CO and continuum data to measure
96: an average gas-to-dust mass
97: ratio of $120 \pm 28$ (rms deviation 109) in the central regions of
98: these galaxies, very similar to the
99: value of 150 determined for the Milky Way.
100: This similarity is interesting given the more
101: intense heating from the starburst and possibly accretion activity
102: in the luminous infrared galaxies compared to the Milky Way.
103: We find that the peak H$_2$ surface density correlates with the
104: far-infrared luminosity, which
105: suggests that galaxies with higher gas surface
106: densities inside the central kiloparsec have a higher star formation rate.
107: The lack of
108: a significant correlation between total H$_2$ mass and
109: far-infrared luminosity in our sample suggests that the increased
110: star formation rate is due to the increased availability of
111: molecular gas as fuel for star formation in the central regions.
112: In contrast to previous analyses by other authors, we do not find a
113: significant correlation between
114: central gas surface density and the star formation efficiency,
115: as trace by the ratio of far-infrared luminosity
116: to nuclear gas mass. Our data show that
117: it is the star formation rate, not the star formation efficiency, that
118: increases with increasing central gas surface density in these galaxies.
119: \end{abstract}
120:
121: \keywords{galaxies: infrared --- galaxies: individual (Arp 55, Arp
122: 193, Arp 299,
123: IRAS 10565+2448, IRAS 17208-0014, Mrk 231, Mrk 273,
124: NGC 1614, NGC 2623, NGC 5331, NGC 5257, NGC 5258, NGC 6240,
125: UGC 5101, VV 114)}
126:
127: %% Authors who wish to have the most important objects in their paper
128: %% linked in the electronic edition to a data center may do so by tagging
129: %% their objects with \objectname{} or \object{}. Each macro takes the
130: %% object name as its required argument. The optional, square-bracket
131: %% argument should be used in cases where the data center identification
132: %% differs from what is to be printed in the paper. The text appearing
133: %% in curly braces is what will appear in print in the published paper.
134: %% If the object name is recognized by the data centers, it will be linked
135: %% in the electronic edition to the object data available at the data centers
136:
137: \section{Introduction}
138:
139: Ultra-luminous infrared galaxies (ULIRGs) contain the regions of most intense
140: star formation in the local universe. Although their high
141: rates of star formation and accretion
142: appear to be triggered by the merger of two
143: gas-rich galaxies \citep{s88a,v02},
144: the detailed physical connection between galaxy
145: mergers and star formation and, in particular, the time evolution of
146: this process, is not well understood.
147: Relating numerical hydrodynamical models \citep{miho96,cox04}
148: to observations is complicated by the difficulty in identifying
149: the precise stage of the merger \citep{murp01}. In addition,
150: while high resolution imaging has found that most ULIRGs have
151: nuclear separations from $<$0.3 kpc to 48 kpc \citep{murp96}, other
152: strongly interacting galaxies with these nuclear separations which are
153: {\it not}
154: ULIRGs have also been found \citep{brai04}. These
155: observations suggest that the onset of the intense star formation
156: and accretion
157: which produces a ULIRG is not a simple function of the age of the
158: merger and leaves open the question of whether all luminous infrared
159: galaxies (LIRGs\footnote{$L_{\rm FIR} = 4
160: \pi D_L^2 F_{\rm FIR}$ $L_\odot$, where $F_{\rm FIR} = 1.26 \times 10^{-14}
161: (2.58 f_{60} + f_{100})$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ and $f_{60}$ and $f_{100}$ are
162: the IRAS fluxes in Jy at 60 and 100 $\mu$m \citep{sanders96}.}; $11
163: \le \log (L_{\rm FIR}/L_\odot) < 12$) will pass through a
164: ULIRG phase ($\log (L_{\rm FIR}/L_\odot) \ge 12$)
165: at some point in their evolution.
166:
167: Local ULIRGs are also important
168: as the closest analogs to the high-redshift submillimeter galaxies
169: \citep[SMGs;][]{blai02}: both populations have high infrared
170: luminosities, large amounts of molecular gas
171: \citep{fray98,fray99,neri03,grev05,t06},
172: and morphological evidence of recent or ongoing
173: mergers \citep{v02,cons03}.
174: Since galaxy
175: merger rates are substantially higher in the early universe
176: \citep{lefe00,gott01},
177: understanding the physical and dynamical properties of nearby
178: ULIRGs is also important for understanding
179: the processes in the early universe which give rise to the
180: very luminous submillimeter galaxy population.
181:
182: Because molecular gas is the fuel for current and future star
183: formation, the physical properties and distribution of the warm,
184: dense molecular gas are crucial for understanding the
185: processes and timescales controlling star formation in galaxy mergers.
186: Previous high-resolution studies of molecular gas in luminous
187: infrared galaxies have used primarily the ground-state rotational
188: transition of CO, which is sensitive to gas as cold as 10~K
189: \citep{s91,ds98,bs99}, with a few galaxies observed in the
190: CO J=2-1 line \citep{bs96,ds98,s99,t99}.
191: However, since the CO J=3-2 line traces the warmer and
192: denser gas, it is more likely to be directly associated with the
193: starburst activity
194: and/or fueling of the active galactic nuclei (AGN) in these galaxies.
195: Indeed, observations of the CO J=3-2
196: emission in two luminous infrared
197: galaxies, VV 114 \citep{iono04} and NGC 6090 \citep{wang04},
198: reveal that the large-scale distribution and kinematics of
199: the CO J=3-2 line can be significantly different from those of the CO
200: J=1-0 line.
201: %However, observations of CO J=3-2 emission in two luminous infrared
202: %galaxies, VV 114 \citep{iono04} and NGC 6090 \citep{wang04},
203: %reveal that the large-scale distribution and kinematics of
204: %the CO J=3-2 line can be significantly different from those of the CO
205: %J=1-0 line, which suggests that the J=3-2 line traces the warmer and
206: %denser gas that is directly associated with the starburst activity
207: %and/or fueling of the active galactic nuclei (AGN) in these galaxies.
208:
209: In this paper, we
210: present new data obtained with the Submillimeter Array (SMA)
211: for a sample of fourteen luminous and ultraluminous infrared
212: galaxies in the CO J=3-2, CO J=2-1, $^{13}$CO J=2-1, and HCO$^+$ J=4-3
213: lines. In addition, we
214: present new high-resolution observations of continuum emission
215: at 880 $\mu$m and 1.3 mm, which allow us to study the dust properties
216: in the central kiloparsec of the galaxies.
217: This SMA legacy survey aims to address five broad scientific
218: questions:
219:
220: \begin{enumerate}
221:
222: \item {\it What are the distributions, kinematics, and
223: physical conditions of dense molecular gas in U/LIRGs?} The high
224: resolution CO J=3-2 data cubes trace the distribution of the
225: warm and dense gas that feeds the starburst (and any accretion) activity
226: in these luminous galaxies.
227: The new SMA CO J=3-2, J=2-1, and $^{13}$CO J=2-1
228: data can be combined with
229: published CO J=1-0 and J=2-1 data for a
230: detailed investigation of the physical properties of the molecular
231: gas using Large Velocity Gradient \citep[LVG,][]{ss74,gk74}
232: and Monte Carlo \citep{juve97} models
233: as our primary diagnostic tools.
234: The CO J=3-2 kinematics allow us to study the detailed gas
235: dynamics in the inner few hundred parsecs, yielding measurements of
236: the total enclosed mass and of the local linewidth that is a parameter
237: in models of disk turbulence.
238: The combination of morphology and kinematics offers clues to the
239: geometry of each merger via comparison of the separation and orientation of
240: the galaxy nuclei with the results from numerical simulations
241: \citep[see, e.g.,][for an analysis of Arp 220]{m01} .
242: % ** here's an example of how to do references with text in paragraph
243:
244: \item {\it What is the distribution of the dust in U/LIRGs?}
245: The 880 $\mu$m continuum images trace the spatial distribution of
246: the cold and warm (10--70 K) dust, which reflects both the local rate of star
247: formation activity and the available mass of gas. The submillimeter dust
248: emission is often significantly more compact than that of CO
249: \citep[e.g.,][]{s99,mt01,s06} % ***
250: arising exclusively from deep in the
251: gravitational potential wells of the galactic nuclei.
252: High-resolution continuum images from the SMA can be combined with
253: spectra from
254: the {\it Spitzer Space Telescope}
255: \citep[e.g.,][]{a07}
256: to estimate the dust temperature via the
257: mid-infrared to submillimeter spectral energy distribution (SED), the
258: dust mass %
259: \citep[including both small and large grains, e.g.,][]{m07}
260: and, indirectly,
261: the gas mass based on 3D radiative transfer modeling \citep{j03}.
262: In addition, these spatially resolved SEDs of local U/LIRGS
263: will improve our interpretation of the templates used
264: for determining photometric redshifts of high-redshift
265: submillimeter galaxies \citep{yun02,a03,a05}.
266:
267:
268: \item {\it Do the gas properties change as the interaction
269: progresses?} Our sample of fourteen U/LIRGs covers a range
270: from mid to late merger stages and should be sufficiently large that we can
271: establish a merger sequence through comparison of global
272: morphologies with numerical models \citep{miho96,cox04}.
273: This data set allows us to determine how the distribution and
274: kinematics of the gas change as a function of physical conditions such
275: as density and temperature, or vice versa,
276: and to correlate those changes with the
277: stage of the merger.
278: This type of detailed gas
279: physics on small scales still poses challenges for numerical simulations.
280: Thus, on large scales, where the dynamics of the system are well
281: described by the models, the numerical simulations can help with the
282: interpretation of the data, while on smaller scales, the data can
283: drive the development of more accurate descriptions for the gas physics in the
284: simulations.
285:
286: \item {\it How do the properties of the dense gas in local
287: U/LIRGs compare to those of the gas in high-redshift submillimeter galaxies?}
288: Armed with a robust local sample of fourteen U/LIRGs, we can make
289: a rigorous comparison of the properties of the gas with those in
290: higher redshift galaxies \citep{grev05,t06}.
291: Changes in gas characteristics over the age of the universe
292: will reveal important information about the process of star formation
293: and ultimately the formation and evolution of galaxies at early times.
294:
295: \item {\it What is the origin of nuclear OH megamasers?}
296: Bright 1667 MHz OH megamaser emission is observed in the nuclei of
297: some luminous infrared galaxies, including five galaxies in our
298: sample (IRAS 17208-0014, Mrk 231, Mrk 273, UGC 5101 and Arp 299).
299: These extremely
300: bright masers are promising tracers of dust-obscured star formation
301: and mergers at high redshifts, and could ultimately be used
302: to estimate the merger rate as a function of redshift \citep{darl02}.
303: However, in order to use OH megamasers as high-redshift probes, we
304: need to understand whether there is a specific
305: type or stage of merger that leads to OH maser emission.
306: Whether maser emission occurs is likely governed
307: by the physical, chemical, and kinematic conditions in the molecular
308: gas in the nuclear
309: regions of the mergers.
310: For example, using global CO and HCN luminosities, \citet{darling07}
311: concludes that OH megamasers are associated with high mean molecular gas
312: densities and high dense gas fractions.
313: Our sample, which contains galaxies with and
314: without megamasers, is well suited for identifying any unique nuclear
315: conditions that produce OH megamasers in luminous infrared galaxies.
316: \end{enumerate}
317:
318: In this paper, we describe the sample selection,
319: observations, and reduction
320: of the survey data (\S~\ref{sec-obs}). We also examine the gas to dust mass
321: ratio in the central kiloparsec (\S~\ref{sec-gasdust}) and correlations
322: between the central gas mass, gas surface density, infrared luminosity,
323: dust temperature, and CO J=3-2/2-1 line ratio (\S~\ref{sec-corr}).
324: A companion paper presents a detailed analysis of the galaxy VV 114
325: \citep{p08}; a detailed analysis of NGC 6240 is given in
326: \citet{i07}. Future papers will
327: compare the results from
328: this survey with similar observations of high-redshift
329: submillimeter galaxies \citep{i08}; examine
330: the physical properties of the molecular gas by combining molecular
331: line observations with radiative transfer models; use the molecular
332: gas data to place constraints on the origin of the OH megamaser activity
333: seen in some of the galaxies in our sample;
334: compare the properties of the cold gas and dust
335: as seen with the SMA with the properties of the warm dust derived
336: from {\it Spitzer} data; and compare the
337: molecular gas and dust properties with the predictions of numerical
338: simulations to place the galaxies into a merger sequence.
339:
340: \section{Observations and Data Reduction\label{sec-obs}}
341:
342: \subsection{Sample selection}
343:
344: For this survey,
345: we selected a %representative: Lee worried about this word
346: sample of luminous and ultraluminous
347: infrared galaxies with redshifts $z < 0.045$ (distances $D_L < 200$
348: Mpc, adopting $H_o = 70$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$, $\Omega_M =
349: 0.3$,
350: $\Omega_\Lambda = 0.7$) and
351: %infrared galaxies with redshifts $z < 0.045$ (distances\footnote{Adopting $H_0 = 70$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$, $\Omega_M =
352: % 0.3$,
353: %$\Omega_\Lambda = 0.7$} $D_L < 200$
354: %Mpc) and
355: far-infrared luminosities $\log L_{\rm FIR} > 11.4$. The distance limit was
356: chosen to allow spatial resolutions of order 1 kpc
357: or better in all the target galaxies. The luminosity cutoff was chosen
358: to allow us to span a wide range of merger properties and luminosities
359: while still concentrating on the most infrared-luminous nearby galaxies.
360: Out of a total of 39 galaxies above declination -20$^o$ \citep{s03}
361: which meet these two
362: criteria, we selected for this survey
363: 14 galaxies with previous interferometric
364: observations in the CO J=1-0 transition.
365: The galaxies observed in this survey are listed in Table~\ref{tbl-sample}
366: and shown in Figure~\ref{fig-dss_beam}. The sample includes five
367: systems in which the two progenitor galaxies are still distinct
368: (Arp 299, Arp 55, VV 114, NGC 5331, and NGC 5257/8); the remaining
369: nine galaxies show a single central concentration.
370:
371: Compared to the full sample of 39 galaxies,
372: the sample observed with
373: the SMA has a much higher fraction of
374: galaxies with a large far-infrared flux (86\% with
375: $F_{\rm FIR} > 45$~Jy compared to 44\% for the full sample).
376: The SMA sample contains a higher proportion of nearby galaxies (29\%
377: with $z < 0.021$
378: compared to 15\% for the full sample), although the mean distance of
379: the SMA sample is only 4\% smaller than the mean distance of the full
380: sample. The SMA sample also
381: has a higher proportion of more luminous galaxies (29\%
382: with $\log L_{\rm FIR} > 11.9$ compared to 13\% for the full sample), and
383: has a mean far-infrared luminosity that
384: is 35\% larger (0.13 in $\log L_{\rm FIR}$) than the full sample.
385: Thus, the
386: sample of galaxies discussed in this paper is slightly biased towards
387: more luminous galaxies than the full luminosity and distance limited
388: sample.
389:
390: \subsection{Data from the Submillimeter Array}
391:
392: Observations with the Submillimeter Array \citep[SMA:][]{h04} were obtained between
393: 2005 May 16 and 2007 May 2.
394: The correlator was configured to have a spectral resolution of 0.8125 MHz
395: (typically $\sim 0.7$ km s$^{-1}$ for CO J=3-2 and $\sim 1.1$ km s$^{-1}$
396: for CO J=2-1)
397: and a bandwidth of 2 GHz, which was covered by 24 ``chunks'' overlapping
398: slightly in
399: frequency in each of the upper and lower sidebands.
400: Each galaxy
401: was observed with the CO J=3-2 transition in the lower sideband
402: of the receiver and continuum in the upper sideband,
403: 10 GHz away. The HCO$^+$ J=4-3 line lies in the high-frequency end of
404: the upper sideband window and was detected in seven of the galaxies in
405: our sample.
406: In addition, nine galaxies were observed in the CO and $^{13}$CO
407: J=2-1 lines and in 1.3 mm continuum in a single tuning. It was not
408: possible to also include the C$^{18}$O J=2-1 line in our passband due
409: to the broad lines of these galaxies.
410: %For each galaxy and spectral line,
411: %the receivers were tuned directly to the frequency of the redshifted
412: %CO line rather than allowing the SMA software to calculate the
413: %observing frequency from the rest frequency and galaxy redshift.
414:
415: Each galaxy was observed in a single configuration of the SMA,
416: either the extended array (unprojected baselines of 50 to 182 m)
417: or the compact array (unprojected baselines of 16 to 69 m).
418: The largest angular scale to which these data are sensitive, as
419: calculated from the minimum $uv$ distance that the data sample well,
420: ranges from 12-16$^{\prime\prime}$ (19-25$^{\prime\prime}$) for the
421: compact array CO J=3-2 (J=2-1) data to
422: 7-10$^{\prime\prime}$ (10-15$^{\prime\prime}$)
423: for the extended
424: array CO J=3-2 (J=2-1) data.
425: %The largest angular scale to which these data are sensitive, as
426: %calculated from the minimum $uv$ distance that the data sample well,
427: %ranges from 12-16$^{\prime\prime}$ for the compact array CO J=3-2 data and
428: %19-25$^{\prime\prime}$ for the compact array CO J=2-1, to 7$^{\prime\prime}$
429: %-10$^{\prime\prime}$ %for the two Mrk galaxies)
430: %for the extended
431: %array CO J=3-2 data and 10-15$^{\prime\prime}$ for the extended
432: %array CO J=2-1.
433: The configuration
434: used in each case was chosen to yield a spatial resolution of 0.7-1 kpc in the
435: CO J=3-2 line; the typical angular resolution at this wavelength
436: is 2.5$^{\prime\prime}$ for the compact configuration and
437: 0.9$^{\prime\prime}$ for the extended configuration.
438: The exceptions were NGC 2623 in CO J=2-1, and NGC 6240
439: and IRAS 17208-0014 in CO J=3-2, which were observed in both the extended and
440: compact arrays, and NGC 5257/8, which was observed in both the compact
441: and sub-compact arrays.
442: For a given galaxy,
443: the same configuration was used for both the CO J=2-1 and the CO J=3-2
444: observations. The field of view of the SMA is $\sim 60^{\prime\prime}$
445: for the
446: CO J=2-1 data and $\sim 40^{\prime\prime}$ for the CO J=3-2 data.
447: Three of the galaxies have sufficiently extended CO
448: emission that a small mosaic of two (Arp 299, NGC 5331) or three (NGC 5257/58)
449: pointings was used.
450:
451: The data for each line-configuration combination in each galaxy were
452: obtained in a single night's observing except for
453: NGC 2623 (CO J=2-1 extended
454: array data), NGC 5257/8 (CO J=3-2 data),
455: and VV 114 (CO J=2-1 data). Between 6 and 8 antennas were
456: used in the observations and the total on-source integration time ranged
457: from 3.0 to 13.0 hr.
458: The typical double sideband system temperatures at transit ranged
459: from 240 to 800 K for the CO J=3-2 data, except for IRAS 17208-0014, for
460: which the values ranged from 650 to 1900 K,
461: and from 140 to 550 K for the CO J=2-1 data.
462: % add Tsys values for NGC 6240 if necessary
463: The observing dates, on-source integration times, and
464: sensitivities obtained with robust weighting
465: are given in Table~\ref{tbl-obs}.
466:
467: The initial data calibration was done using the MIR software package.
468: Observations of Uranus, Neptune, Ganymede, or Callisto were used to
469: determine the current flux of the gain
470: calibrator, which was a nearby quasar with a flux of at least 0.6 Jy.
471: The amplitude and phase gain variations with
472: time were calibrated using this gain calibrator.
473: Antenna-based gain solutions were used throughout except for
474: the extended array observations of NGC 2623 which required
475: baseline-based gain solutions.
476: Bandpass calibration was determined using a strong quasar such as 3C273,
477: 3C279, or 3C111.
478: We estimate the absolute flux calibration accuracy of these data
479: to be 20\%.
480: However, some of the galaxies are at redshifts such that ozone
481: lines affect the atmospheric transmission in the CO J=3-2 line (Arp 55,
482: UGC 5101) or 880 $\mu$m
483: continuum (Arp 299, Mrk 273, and, to a lesser extent, Arp 55, Mrk 231,
484: NGC 5331, and UGC 5101, for which only 200 MHz of the continuum
485: bandwidth might be affected); thus, the absolute calibration for these
486: galaxies is more uncertain.
487: % NGC 6240 and I17208 are free of ozone lines too
488: After calibration in MIR, the data were exported to MIRIAD format
489: \citep{s95} for
490: further editing and imaging.
491:
492: The data were first flagged to remove the six beginning and ending channels
493: of each of the 24 chunks of the correlator. The data were also flagged
494: to remove high amplitude data points, with typically $<$ 1\% of the data
495: removed in this step. For a few data sets, additional flagging was used
496: to remove data at the beginning or end of the track when deteriorating
497: weather conditions or high system temperatures at lower elevations
498: had caused a larger amplitude scatter. Data cubes were made
499: using velocity resolutions of 10, 20, and 40 km s$^{-1}$ for the CO
500: J=3-2 and J=2-1 lines, 20, 40, and 100 km s$^{-1}$ for the $^{13}$CO
501: J=2-1 line, and 40 and 100 km s$^{-1}$ for the HCO$^+$ J=4-3 line.
502: For the $^{13}$CO J=2-1 and HCO$^+$ data sets where significant
503: continuum emission was detected (see below), the continuum emission was
504: subtracted in the $uv$ plane using line-free channels before imaging.
505: All data cubes were inverted with weighting by the system temperature
506: and moderate robustness, which gives
507: the optimal tradeoff between sensitivity and resolution.
508:
509: Each data cube was cleaned down to two times the rms noise,
510: except for NGC 6240, which was cleaned down to the rms noise. For most sources,
511: the beam was sufficiently clean and the emission sufficiently compact that
512: cleaning the inner quarter of the image produced good results. However,
513: four sources located near the equator (IRAS 17208-0014, NGC 5331,
514: NGC 5257, and NGC 6240)
515: had large sidelobes and/or extended emission and were cleaned using
516: regions chosen by inspecting the dirty maps
517: to isolate the emission from the galaxy; the same fixed regions
518: were used for all velocity channels. The final data cubes
519: were corrected for the attenuation of the SMA primary beam
520: or the analgous response for the combined mosaic before
521: we measured the integrated source fluxes.
522:
523: Continuum maps at 1.3 mm and 880 $\mu$m were made by imaging the
524: individual line-free
525: regions of the spectra; there were four such regions at 1.3 mm (one
526: on either side of each of the CO and $^{13}$CO J=2-1 lines)
527: and three regions at 880 $\mu$m (one on either side of the CO J=3-2
528: line and a single broad region in the upper sideband that excluded
529: the region of the spectrum containing possible emission from the
530: HCO$^+$ J=4-3 line).
531: These continuum images were then averaged together, weighting by
532: the inverse of the product of the bandwidth of each image and the
533: square of its noise,
534: to obtain a single continuum image with the best sensitivity.
535: The continuum images were not cleaned, as the signal-to-noise
536: ratio was low and the source(s) were generally compact and well separated
537: from any sidelobes of the main beam. The one exception is Mrk 231,
538: where the central source was sufficiently strong that cleaning was
539: useful.
540:
541: Table~\ref{tbl-fluxes} gives the continuum and integrated
542: $^{12}$CO, $^{13}$CO, and HCO$^+$ fluxes measured
543: for the galaxies in our sample. The fluxes measured for the CO J=3-2
544: line and 880 $\mu$m continuum emission for NGC6240 differ somewhat
545: from the values given in \citet{i07} due to the different weighting
546: used.
547: Previously published data for the
548: CO J=2-1 and J=1-0 lines are also given where available.
549: Figures~\ref{fig-I17208co32}-\ref{fig-NGC1614co21}
550: show the moment 0, 1, and 2 images
551: for the CO J=3-2 and CO J=2-1 data, the 880 $\mu$m and 1.3 mm
552: dirty maps where signal was detected from the galaxy
553: at the 3$\sigma$ level or better, and the $^{13}$CO J=2-1
554: and HCO$^+$ J=4-3
555: integrated intensity maps, where these lines were detected.
556: Unless otherwise noted
557: in the figure captions, the moment 0 maps
558: have been made from the 40 km s$^{-1}$ resolution data cube using
559: only signal greater than $\pm 2\sigma$, while
560: the moment 1 and 2 maps have been made from the 20 km s$^{-1}$ resolution data
561: cube using only positive signal greater than 4$\sigma$.
562: These images have not been corrected for the primary beam or mosaic
563: response.
564: Figures~\ref{fig-co32_mrk_iras}-\ref{fig-co32_n1614_n5258} show
565: the CO J=3-2 spectra,
566: Figures~\ref{fig-co21_i10565_u5101_arp299}-\ref{fig-co21_n1614_n5257}
567: show the CO J=2-1 spectra,
568: Figures~\ref{fig-13co21_arp299}-\ref{fig-13co21_rest}
569: show the $^{13}$CO J=2-1 spectra
570: and
571: Figure~\ref{fig-HCOp} shows the HCO$^+$ J=4-3 spectra.
572: In all cases except HCO$^+$,
573: both the spectrum at the position of the emission peak and
574: the spectrum integrated over the entire region
575: with emission are shown.
576:
577: \subsubsection{Morphology and kinematics of the CO emission}
578:
579: Figures~\ref{fig-I17208co32}-\ref{fig-NGC1614co21} reveal a diversity of
580: morphologies and kinematics for the molecular gas in our sample of
581: galaxies. Nine of the galaxies show a predominantly compact morphology
582: while the remaining five galaxies range from well-separated pairs of
583: galaxies to highly complex morphologies. The galaxies with extended CO
584: emission are all found in the lower luminosity half of our sample,
585: although some low luminosity galaxies also show a compact
586: morphology. The source sizes derived from two-dimensional Gaussian
587: fits to the CO J=3-2 images and the line widths (full width at half
588: maximum) derived from the
589: CO J=3-2 spectra are tabulated in \citet{i08}.
590: The distributions of the CO J=3-2 and J=2-1 emissions are
591: qualitatively similar; we will discuss the line ratio
592: distributions in more detail in a future paper.
593:
594: The kinematics of the molecular gas are also quite varied. Integrating
595: over the full emission region in each galaxy
596: (Figures~\ref{fig-co32_mrk_iras}-\ref{fig-co21_n1614_n5257}), the
597: line widths at half maximum range from 200 km s$^{-1}$ in Mrk 231 to
598: 650 km s$^{-1}$ in UGC 5101. Some of the line profiles are quite
599: smooth and gaussian (e.g. Mrk 231), while others have more of a
600: double-peaked structure (e.g. UGC 5101). The maps of the velocity
601: fields (Figures~\ref{fig-I17208co32}-\ref{fig-NGC1614co21})
602: show many examples of smooth and regular rotation
603: among the more compact galaxies, although some of the
604: compact galaxies, such as Mrk 273 and NGC 6240,
605: are significantly distorted. Two of
606: the galaxies with extended CO emission, Arp 299 and VV 114
607: show very complex and distorted velocity fields. The maps of the
608: velocity dispersions show that the peak velocity dispersion is
609: commonly 80-100 km s$^{-1}$.
610: However, the peak velocity dispersions for
611: IRAS 17208-0014, Mrk 273, UGC 5101, NGC6240, and
612: NGC 5331S are twice as large as the typical galaxy in our sample.
613: The lower velocity dispersions seen for NGC 5257/8 are likely due to
614: the lower signal-to-noise of those maps; similarly, a lower velocity
615: dispersion
616: is seen for NGC 5331S in the CO J=3-2 line than in the CO J=2-1 line.
617:
618: Our velocity
619: dispersions are typically about 70\% of the values measured from CO
620: band-head emission in the near-infrared
621: \citep{hr06,d06}.
622: In some cases, the lower
623: values found in this paper may be related to the somewhat lower
624: angular resolution of the millimeter-wave CO observations, as
625: discussed by \citet{hr06}. The near-infrared data may also
626: overestimate the velocity dispersion if the CO band-head emission is
627: strongly peaked on
628: the nucleus \citep{hr06}. We derive a significantly larger velocity
629: disperion for IRAS 17208-0014; this may be due to the lower
630: signal-to-noise ratio of the near-infrared spectrum for this galaxy.
631:
632: % ** perhaps add references to previous work? DS98?
633:
634: \subsubsection{The relative strength of the HCO$^+$ J=4-3 emission}
635:
636: We detect the HCO$^+$ J=4-3 line in seven of the fourteen galaxies in
637: our sample. Since the weak HCO$^+$ emission is extremely compact, we
638: compare the line strength to the peak line strength of the CO J=3-2
639: line. The CO/HCO$^+$ line ratios are 8 and 16 for Mrk 231 and NGC
640: 2623, respectively, and range from $\le$7 to $\le$32 for the other
641: five galaxies. Treating all the HCO$^+$ lines as detections rather
642: than upper limits, and
643: treating the detections of the eastern and central components of VV114
644: separately, the
645: average line ratio is 19 with an rms deviation of 9. However, the true
646: average line ratio for these galaxies is likely somewhat smaller,
647: since many of the HCO$^+$ detections are lower limits because the line
648: emission extends to the edge of the spectral window.
649:
650: This line ratio
651: is comparable to the average CO/HCO$^+$ line ratio using the J=1-0 and
652: J=3-2 lines, respectively, determined for 6 of the galaxies in our
653: sample by \citet{gc06}, who also find a roughly constant CO/HCO$^+$
654: line ratio as a function of L$_{\rm FIR}$. High-resolution HCO$^+$
655: J=1-0 data have been published for four of the galaxies in our sample
656: by \citet{i06,iman07}. Comparing their data with our new measurements
657: yields HCO$^+$ J=4-3/J=1-0 line ratios of about 4 in both Mrk231 and
658: Arp 299, while this same line ratio appears to vary dramatically from
659: place to place within VV 114. The HCN/HCO$^+$ J=1-0 line ratio
660: also varies spatially in VV 114 \citep{iman07} and in Arp 299 \citep{i06},
661: which suggests that there
662: are interesting physical and/or chemical variations in the gas
663: properties in these early-stage mergers. Large variations in the
664: HCN J=4-3/J=1-0 ratio in a sample of four galaxies are evidence for
665: significant differences in the excitation in the gas phase
666: \citep{p07a}.
667:
668: %xxx
669:
670:
671: The seven galaxies detected in HCO$^+$ are the galaxies
672: with strong centrally peaked lines, for which the ratio of the CO peak
673: flux to the full-width half-maximum of the line is greater than 1
674: (Table~\ref{tbl-dustmasspeak} and
675: Figure~\ref{fig-co32_mrk_iras}-\ref{fig-co32_n1614_n5258}). Thus, it
676: appears that we
677: have detected HCO$^+$ in all the galaxies in our sample where we have
678: sufficient sensitivity to detect the peak of the line in a single
679: channel. The fact that the remaining galaxies are not detected may be
680: attributed to insufficient sensitivity; while it is possible that some
681: of these galaxies
682: may be relatively weak in HCO$^+$ compared to CO, we have no direct
683: evidence of any such line ratio variations.
684:
685: % ** add referces for HCO+ 4-3 from single dish?
686: % nothing found for Papadopoulos, van der werf, or israel
687: % ask Melanie, as she has a recent moderately relevant paper
688:
689: \subsubsection{The relative strength of the $^{13}$CO J=2-1 emission}
690:
691: Of the nine galaxies observed at 230 GHz with the SMA, we have
692: detected $^{13}$CO J=2-1 emission in only four galaxies: Arp 299,
693: VV 114, NGC 5331S, and NGC 1614. All of these galaxies except NGC 5331S
694: were also detected in HCO$^+$; the only galaxy that was observed at
695: 230 GHz and detected in HCO$^+$ but {\it not} in $^{13}$CO is NGC
696: 2623. This is likely because NGC 2623 is less luminous in CO J=2-1
697: (compare NGC 2623 with NGC 1614 in Table~\ref{tbl-fluxes}). Given the
698: average strength of the $^{13}$CO line compared to the CO line in our
699: four detections, we would not expect to detect any of the remaining
700: galaxies in our sample at the 3 sigma level or better.
701:
702: \subsection{Published and Archival Single-Dish Data}
703:
704: In this section, we summarize published single-dish data for the CO J=3-2
705: line and 880 $\mu$m continuum from the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope (JCMT).
706: To these published results we add unpublished
707: continuum and spectral line data taken from the JCMT
708: archive. The sample of single-dish data for the CO J=2-1 line and 1.3
709: mm continuum is less complete; the available data
710: will be discussed in a future paper.
711:
712: \subsubsection{Single-Dish CO J=3-2 Data}
713:
714: A search of the JCMT archive reveals that many of the galaxies in our
715: sample have been observed in the CO J=3-2 line with the JCMT
716: with a 15$^{\prime\prime}$ beam.
717: In addition, we used the JCMT to make small (7x7) Nyquist-sampled
718: maps (program M05AC05) or 2$^\prime$ Nyquist-sampled maps with the new
719: array receiver HARP-B (program M07AC11) of many of our
720: galaxies in the CO J=3-2 line. Our
721: ultimate goal is to combine
722: these single-dish data with our SMA data to obtain complete maps
723: without any missing spatial frequencies.
724: An example and discussion of
725: this technique as applied to VV 114 is given in \citet{p08}.
726: These maps also can be used to estimate the total CO J=3-2
727: emission from some of our galaxies. By combining our new data with
728: archival data, we can obtain single-dish CO J=3-2 spectra for all the galaxies
729: in our sample except NGC 5331.
730: % which wasn't done in M07AC11 because the line was so wide
731: % and ACSIS wasn't happy in 2 GHz mode
732:
733: The quality of the data varies quite significantly from one galaxy to
734: another. For three galaxies (VV 114, NGC 2623, NGC 1614), we have
735: maps covering 35$^{\prime\prime}$ on a side that clearly include
736: all the emission from the galaxy. For Arp 299 and NGC 5258, we have
737: maps covering 2$^\prime$ on a side but with bad baselines in some of
738: the outer pixels; in addition, these data needed to be scaled up by a
739: factor of 1.25 to make
740: observations of spectral line standards consistent with
741: previous results. We also adopt a higher calibration uncertainty
742: (30\%) for these data sets.
743: Mrk 273, Mrk 231, IRAS 10565+2448, UGC 5101,
744: IRAS 17208-0014, NGC 6240, and Arp 193
745: % and Arp220
746: were all observed in a single co-ordinated program in 1999 (program M99AN19,
747: PI. Papadopoulos) with many observations of calibrators to check for
748: calibration consistency.
749: Arp 55 has only a single
750: spectrum centered roughly on the south-western source that is visible
751: in our interferometric maps (Figure~\ref{fig-Arp55co32}). This flux
752: measurement must be considered
753: a lower limit since this pointing would detect very little emission from
754: the stronger northern source. For NGC 5257, there is a
755: single spectrum published in
756: \citet{y03}. We reduced these data again (program M01AC03, PI
757: Seaquist), including the
758: calibration data, and there appear to be some problems with
759: the calibration during these observations. The main beam efficiency is
760: 20\% lower than the standard value and the observations of the
761: spectral line standards are also lower by about a similar amount.
762: Although we have corrected for these effects in calculating the
763: CO flux, the calibration must be considered more
764: uncertain for this galaxy.
765:
766: In converting the single-dish fluxes from their intrinsic units
767: of K(T$_A^*$) km s$^{-1}$ to Jy km s$^{-1}$, we assume an aperture
768: efficiency of 0.5, which gives a scaling factor of
769: 31.3 Jy K$^{-1}$. All of the galaxies in our sample that have not been
770: mapped are sufficiently
771: compact that we assume a point-source distribution in
772: converting from K to Jy. The exception is Arp 55, for which
773: we assume the emission
774: fills the main beam of the telescope and thus divide by the main
775: beam efficiency $\eta_{MB} = 0.63$ before multiplying by 31.3 Jy K$^{-1}$.
776: For the four galaxies with small maps, each spectrum was converted
777: to Jy km s$^{-1}$ using the point source scaling factor, and then
778: the spectra were summed and normalized by the number of pixels per
779: 15$^{\prime\prime}$ beam in the map to obtain the final integrated flux.
780: The resulting single-dish CO J=3-2 fluxes are given in Table~\ref{tbl-co32}.
781:
782: \subsubsection{Single-Dish 880 $\mu$m Data}
783:
784: Published 850 or 800 $\mu$m fluxes from the JCMT
785: are available for all the galaxies in our
786: sample except NGC 5331 and Arp 299.
787: %VV 114 is in Frayer et al.; for simplicity I stay with the archive data.
788: % Arp 220 in Dunne et al.
789: Data presented by \citet{r96} for Mrk 231, Mrk 273, and UGC 5101 were
790: obtained with the single-pixel bolometer UKT14 at 800 $\mu$m, while data
791: from \citet{k01} for IRAS 17208-0014 and NGC 6240 and \citet{d00}
792: for the remaining galaxies were obtained with the bolometer
793: array SCUBA at 850 $\mu$m. In addition,
794: SCUBA data for VV 114, NGC 5331, and Arp 299 are
795: available in the JCMT archive. These data were processed into
796: images using an automatic pipeline \citep{dF08} and the fluxes were
797: measured by us from those
798: images.
799:
800: % *** Frayer paper for VV114?
801:
802:
803: We then rescaled the fluxes by dividing by a factor of
804: $1.13 \pm 0.02$ (850 $\mu$m) or $1.40 \pm 0.06$ (800 $\mu$m)
805: to obtain an estimate of the continuum flux at 880 $\mu$m.
806: These scaling factors assume a dust emissivity $\beta = 1.5 \pm 0.5$.
807: The resulting single-dish 880 $\mu$m continuum fluxes are given in
808: Table~\ref{tbl-cont}. The published uncertainties vary somewhat
809: in their meaning from author to author. \citet{k01}
810: simply adopt an uncertainty of 30\%. The errors given by
811: \citet{r96} and for VV 114, NGC 5331, and Arp 299 are
812: purely statistical measurement errors with no calibration uncertainty
813: added in. The errors given by \citet{d00} include a calibration
814: uncertainty of 10\% (15\% for NGC 5257 and NGC 5258). In comparing
815: the single-dish and SMA fluxes, we have adopted a 20\% calibration
816: uncertainty for each telescope and adjusted the published
817: uncertainties for the single-dish data accordingly.
818:
819: \subsection{Comparison of interferometric and single-dish
820: fluxes\label{missing}}
821:
822: A comparison of the CO J=3-2 fluxes recovered by the SMA with
823: the fluxes seen by the JCMT shows that the interferometric data miss
824: a significant fraction of the CO J=3-2 emission for eight of the galaxies
825: in our sample.
826: In these galaxies,
827: we are typically missing 50\% of the total single-dish
828: flux. However, only for three galaxies in our
829: sample, Arp 299, VV 114, and NGC 1614,
830: does this missing flux manifest itself as significant
831: negative bowls in the moment maps
832: (Figures~\ref{fig-Arp299co32},
833: ~\ref{fig-VV114co32}, and~\ref{fig-NGC1614co32}).
834: These are the three galaxies with the largest
835: absolute amount of missing flux and so it makes sense that they are
836: the ones in which the missing flux leaves a detectable negative signal in the
837: maps.
838:
839: We can also calculate the percentage of continuum
840: flux missed by the interferometric observations
841: by comparing the continuum flux detected with the SMA to the
842: single-dish continuum flux detected with the JCMT. In doing this
843: calculation, we also correct for the contribution of the CO J=3-2
844: line within the SCUBA filter using the formula given by
845: \citet{s04}. The results given in
846: Table~\ref{tbl-cont} show that, while the interferometric observations
847: detect all of the single-dish continuum flux in four galaxies (and
848: possibly in a fifth, NGC 5258, if the
849: off-nuclear continuum source is not time variable),
850: for the remaining nine galaxies typically 50-80\% of the continuum
851: flux is missed by the interferometer.
852:
853: This result is somewhat surprising, as the few sources studied
854: previously at millimeter wavelengths at high resolution show quite
855: compact continuum emission. For example,
856: \citet{s99} detect all the 1.3 mm continuum emission in Arp 220
857: and find it is contained in two compact components associated with
858: the merging nuclei. For Mrk 231, \citet{ds98} also detect
859: all of the 1.3 mm continuum emission seen in single-dish
860: data \citep{c92}, although in this case the emission is thought to
861: be primarily non-thermal emission from the central AGN, with
862: thermal emission from dust contributing only 20\% of the total flux.
863: Mrk 273 and Arp 193 have also been detected at 1.3 mm by \citet{ds98},
864: but there are no single-dish data for these galaxies that can be used to
865: determine the total flux.
866:
867: The large amount of missing continuum
868: flux in many of our sample galaxies suggests that
869: a significant fraction of the 880 $\mu$m emission occurs on
870: moderately large spatial scales
871: even in systems with very luminous compact cores.
872: (The 15$^{\prime\prime}$ beam of the JCMT subtends 3-14 kpc at
873: the distances of the galaxies in our sample.)
874: A plot of the percentage of flux missing at 880 $\mu$m versus the
875: percentage missing in the CO J=3-2 line (not shown) shows reasonable agreement
876: for all galaxies, although on average there is a slightly higher
877: percentage of the total flux missing in the continuum images.
878: The good agreement between the percentage of missing flux seen in
879: the CO J=3-2 line and the 880 $\mu$m continuum suggests that the missing
880: continuum flux comes from dust emission associated with molecular
881: gas in the more extended disks of the galaxies. Such gas could
882: be associated with a disk-wide
883: starburst (as opposed to a nuclear starburst) or more quiescent star
884: formation as is seen in less luminous spiral galaxies.
885: The difference between
886: our results and previous results for Arp 220 and Mrk 231
887: is likely due to the fading contribution from dust emission at 1.3 mm
888: combined with the importance of non-thermal and possibly free-free
889: emission in these two galaxies.
890: %The merger age may also play a role in the amount of extended
891: %continuum emission from dust; Arp 220 and Mrk 231 are both advanced
892: %mergers, as are Mrk 273 and NGC 2623, the other galaxies in our sample
893: %where we detect all the gas and dust in a central compact source.
894:
895: \section{The Gas-to-Dust Mass Ratio in the Nuclear Regions\label{sec-gasdust}}
896:
897: We can use our new CO J=3-2 and 880 $\mu$m data to estimate the
898: gas and dust masses, and in particular the
899: gas-to-dust mass ratio, in the central regions of these luminous infrared
900: galaxies. The gas-to-dust ratio is interesting because
901: it allows us to probe the physical
902: properties of the interstellar medium on kiloparsec scales in
903: regions of galaxies with intense heating from starburst activity
904: and (perhaps) vigorous accretion. Alternatively, it can be used to
905: provide an independent check of the gas masses determined
906: from the CO emission lines. The gas mass in the central region
907: is a critical quantity for understanding the evolution of these
908: galaxies, as it determines the fuel for the current activity, be it
909: a central starburst or accretion onto an active nucleus.
910:
911: \subsection{Gas and Dust Mass Calculations\label{calc}}
912:
913: We have calculated the dust mass from the 880 $\mu$m flux
914: assuming a dust emissivity at 880 $\mu$m, $\kappa = 0.9$ cm$^2$
915: g$^{-1}$, appropriate for molecular cloud envelopes \citep{h95,j00}.
916: With this assumption, the dust mass is given by
917: %$$ M_{dust} = 74220 { {S_{880}} \over {\rm 1~Jy~km~s^{-1}}} { {D_L^2} \over {1 {\rm Mpc}}} { {\rm 1~cm^2 g^{-1}} \over {\kappa}} (\exp(17/T_d) -1) $$
918: \begin{equation}
919: M_{dust} = 74220 S_{880} D_L^2 (\exp(17/T_D) -1) /\kappa \hskip6pt
920: {\rm (M_\odot)}
921: \end{equation}
922: where $S_{880}$ is the 880 $\mu$m flux in Jy and $D_L$ is the luminosity
923: distance in Mpc.
924: We calculated the dust temperature, $T_D$, from
925: optically thin modified black-body fits to published global photometric data
926: between 60 and 800 $\mu$m, following the procedure of \citet{k01}.
927: %the 60 and 100 $\mu$m fluxes \citep{s03} assuming the emission at
928: %these wavelengths is optically thick \citep{s97}.
929: Our derived temperatures for
930: Mrk 231, Mrk 273, UGC 5101, and NGC6240 are between 5 K and 10 K
931: warmer than the temperature of the
932: cold component derived by \citet{a07}. However, our temperatures are
933: generally in good agreement (except for Mrk231, for which we are 8 K
934: colder) with the values derived by \citet{yp07} in fits including new
935: data at 350 $\mu$m.
936:
937: To calculate the molecular hydrogen gas mass from the CO J=3-2 emission
938: line, we need to know the CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor, $X_{\rm CO}$. While
939: this conversion factor is now reasonably well determined for normal
940: galaxies \citep{strong88,ws90,sm96,d01,r03},
941: it has been clear for many years that the standard
942: conversion factor does not apply to starbursting systems like the
943: galaxies studied here \citep{bs96,ds98}.
944: In addition, the conversion factor has been determined for the CO J=1-0
945: line only. To apply the appropriate conversion factor to our CO J=3-2
946: data also requires us to know or assume an appropriate CO J=3-2/J=1-0
947: line ratio.
948:
949: To calculate the H$_2$ gas mass, we adopt the revised conversion factor
950: advocated by \citet{ds98}, $M_{\rm H_2} = 0.8 L^\prime_{\rm CO}(1-0)$, where
951: $M_{\rm H_2}$ is the H$_2$ gas mass in $M_\odot$ and $L^\prime_{\rm CO}(1-0)$ is the
952: luminosity of the CO J=1-0 line in K km s$^{-1}$ pc$^2$.
953: [This equation corresponds to a CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor
954: of $0.5 \times 10^{20}$ H$_2$ cm$^{-2}$ (K km s$^{-1}$)$^{-1}$.]
955: To convert our measurements in Jy km s$^{-1}$ to units of K km s$^{-1}$ pc$^2$,
956: we use the equation
957: \begin{equation}
958: {L^\prime \over {\rm K~km~s^{-1}~pc^2}} = 3.2546\times 10^7
959: ({S_{\rm CO} \over {\rm Jy~km~s^{-1}}}) ({D_L \over {\rm Mpc}})^2
960: ({\nu_0 \over {\rm GHz}})^{-2} (1+z)^{-1}\end{equation}
961: where $S_{\rm CO}$ is the CO integrated intensity, $\nu_0$ is the
962: rest frequency of the CO transition, and $z$ is the redshift.
963: To determine
964: the CO J=3-2/J=1-0 line ratio, we compared the interferometric and
965: single-dish CO J=3-2 data discussed here with published
966: interferometric CO J=1-0 data of similar angular resolution \citep{ds98},
967: and single-dish data for Mrk 231 \citep{s97} and Mrk 273
968: \citep{gs04}. The average single-dish line ratio for the latter two galaxies
969: is 0.48, while the average interferometric line ratio is 0.56, where
970: both values are calculated on the temperature scale.
971: Assuming absolute calibration uncertainties of 20\% for both data sets,
972: these two values agree well, and so we adopt an average CO J=3-2/J=1-0
973: line ratio of 0.5 in calculating the H$_2$ gas mass. Thus, the
974: H$_2$ gas mass is calculated via
975: \begin{equation} M_{\rm H_2} = 1.6 L^\prime_{\rm CO}(3-2) \end{equation}
976: where $L^\prime_{\rm CO}(3-2)$ is the
977: luminosity of the CO J=3-2 line in K km s$^{-1}$ pc$^2$.
978: (Note that to obtain the total mass in molecular gas, $M_{\rm mol}$,
979: M$_{\rm H_2}$ would need to be multiplied by a factor of 1.36 to
980: account for helium.)
981: Gas and dust masses and the gas-to-dust mass ratio calculated
982: from the total detected CO J=3-2 and 880 $\mu$m luminosity of
983: each galaxy or galaxy component are given in
984: Table~\ref{tbl-dustmass}, while similar quantities calculated from
985: the peak CO J=3-2 emission and 880 $\mu$m flux in a single
986: beam are given in Table~\ref{tbl-dustmasspeak}.
987:
988: \subsection{Uncertainties in Gas and Dust Masses}
989:
990: The primary source of uncertainty in the H$_2$ masses we have
991: calculated is the CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor. We have
992: adopted here the value advocated by \citet{ds98} as being the most
993: appropriate for ultraluminous infrared galaxies. The Milky
994: Way value for this conversion factor is about 5 times larger
995: \citep{s97}. Thus, if some of the galaxies in our sample, particularly
996: the less luminous ones, have an interstellar medium more similar to
997: that of the Milky Way than that of ultraluminous infrared galaxies,
998: the H$_2$ masses in Tables~\ref{tbl-dustmass} and~\ref{tbl-dustmasspeak}
999: could be underestimated by up to a factor of five. Detailed radiative
1000: transfer and dynamical modelling can reduce the uncertainty in this
1001: factor by probing the physical conditions directly \citep{i07} and may
1002: provide an independent determination of the CO-to-H$_2$ conversion
1003: factor, and will be presented in a future paper.
1004:
1005: A second source of uncertainty comes in our adopted value of
1006: the CO J=3-2/J=1-0 line ratio. This uncertainty is probably not as
1007: large as the uncertainty caused by the CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor,
1008: as the line ratio we have adopted as being appropriate for Mrk 231
1009: and Mrk 273 agrees very well with the line ratio seen in star forming
1010: regions in more normal spiral galaxies such as M33 \citep{w97} and in
1011: the more highly inclined galaxies from the sample of
1012: \citet{dumke01}. However, many of the galaxies in the \citet{dumke01} sample
1013: have line ratios of 1-1.4, so if it introduces any bias,
1014: our adopted line ratio would
1015: overestimate the H$_2$ mass by a factor of at most 2-3. Also, any
1016: systematic changes in the line ratio with luminosity or evolutionary
1017: phase would introduce similar systematic effects into the gas-to-dust
1018: mass ratio. A spatially resolved comparison with high resolution CO
1019: J=1-0 images
1020: of these galaxies, which would reduce the uncertainty due to the line
1021: ratio, will be presented in a future paper
1022: \citep[see also][]{i07}.
1023:
1024: One major source of uncertainty in the dust masses we have calculated is
1025: the dust temperature. An alternative to assuming optically thin dust
1026: with emissivity varying as $\nu^\beta$ is to
1027: assume that the 60 and 100 $\mu$m fluxes can be fit with
1028: an optically thick blackbody as in \citet{s97}.
1029: This method gives, on average, dust temperatures that are 1.5 times larger
1030: and dust masses that are 0.55 times smaller than the values given
1031: here. The net result
1032: of assuming optically thick emission in the far-infrared would be to
1033: increase the gas-to-dust mass ratio by about a factor of two.
1034: Conversely, if we have overestimated the dust temperature by using
1035: single component fits (\S\ref{calc}), this would have a net effect of
1036: decreasing the gas-to-dust mass ratio.
1037:
1038: %One major source of uncertainty in the dust masses we have calculated is
1039: %the dust temperature. Assuming that the 60 and 100 $\mu$m fluxes
1040: %are fit with an optically thick blackbody produces higher dust
1041: %temperatures (and thus lower masses) than would be obtained
1042: %with the more conventional assumption of optically thin
1043: %emission with a dust emissivity varying as $\nu^\beta$ \citep{s97}.
1044: %If we were to assume $\beta = 1$, then the dust masses given in
1045: %Tables~\ref{tbl-dustmass} and~\ref{tbl-dustmasspeak} would increase
1046: %by 30\% for the galaxies with the lowest temperatures and 60\% for
1047: %the galaxies with the largest temperatures. If we were to assume
1048: %$\beta =2$ the increases would be 60\% and 110\%, respectively.
1049:
1050: Another source of uncertainty comes from the value of the
1051: dust emissivity that we have assumed. A value of $\kappa
1052: = 0.9$ cm$^2$ g$^{-1}$ is appropriate for moderately dense gas in
1053: star-forming regions in the Galaxy
1054: \citep{h95,j00},
1055: while \citet{d00} assumed
1056: $\kappa = 0.77$ cm$^2$ g$^{-1}$ \citep{dl84,h93} in deriving dust masses for
1057: their survey of nearby galaxies. It is possible that the dust
1058: emissivity is modified drastically in the hot, dense central
1059: regions of these galaxies. However, without sufficient data
1060: at high angular resolution to fit physical dust models (see below),
1061: it is impossible at the moment to determine how large an effect this
1062: might be. In any case, the dust masses determined here are likely
1063: uncertain by a factor of less than 2 due to the uncertain value of $\kappa$.
1064:
1065: The ideal procedure for determing dust mass would be to fit a
1066: detailed physical model to the full infrared spectral energy
1067: distribution, as has been done by \citet{g03} for the
1068: dwarf galaxy NGC 1569 or \citet{r04} for NGC 7331. However, only
1069: near-infrared and ground-based mid-infrared
1070: data can approach the angular resolution of
1071: our 880 $\mu$m SMA data.
1072: The critical mid- and far-infrared
1073: spectral regions can be covered by the {\it Spitzer Space Telescope}, for which
1074: the angular resolution ranges from 1.5$^{\prime\prime}$ at 3.6
1075: $\mu$m to 47$^{\prime\prime}$ at 160 $\mu$m. Near-infrared data from
1076: {\it Spitzer} can probe the hot dust continuum %and warm molecular hydrogen
1077: \citep{h06},
1078: while data for the mid- and far-infrared part of the spectrum %is more suited to
1079: only allow
1080: a determination of galaxy-wide dust properties and do not isolate
1081: the central regions discussed here. In addition, diffraction-limited
1082: ground-based
1083: mid-infrared photometry at 12.5 $\mu$m is available for nine galaxies in
1084: our sample \citep{s00,s01}; however, no data beyond 30 $\mu$m with
1085: arcsecond-scale resolution are currently available from any
1086: instrument. We defer a more detailed analysis of the
1087: dust temperature and properties inferred by combining our
1088: submillimeter data with infrared data to a future paper.
1089: %Until mid- and far-infrared
1090: %data become available with an angular resolution of at least
1091: %5$^{\prime\prime}$, the simple single-temperature analysis presented
1092: %here is the best that can be done on these small angular scales.
1093:
1094: \subsection{Total Gas and Dust Masses from SMA Data}
1095:
1096: The central H$_2$ gas masses calculated from the total luminosities
1097: detected with the SMA range from
1098: $1.4 \times 10^{9}$ $M_\odot$ for NGC 5257 to
1099: $1.2 \times 10^{10}$ $M_\odot$ for NGC 6240
1100: while the central dust masses range from $3\times 10^6$ $M_\odot$
1101: for NGC 1614 to $8\times 10^7$ $M_\odot$ for
1102: Mrk 231 (Table~\ref{tbl-dustmass}).
1103: The central gas-to-dust ratios also show a wide variation,
1104: from as low as 29 for Arp 55(NE) to as high as 720
1105: for NGC 6240.
1106: %Excluding NGC 5258, for which the continuum
1107: %emission and CO emission arise in different regions of the
1108: %galaxy (see Appendix), the average gas-to-dust ratio is
1109: Excluding the three galaxy components with non-detections in the continuum,
1110: the average gas-to-dust ratio is
1111: $215 \pm 53$ (rms deviation 207). This value is about 40\%
1112: larger than the typical Milky Way value of $\sim$150
1113: \citep{d07}, and there is a large
1114: dispersion of the individual values about the average. Our value
1115: is also significantly smaller than the value of 540 (rms deviation
1116: 290) determined by \citet{sanders91} using single-dish CO J=1-0 data
1117: and far-infrared luminosities. However, that study adopted a
1118: CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor that is six times larger than our value,
1119: which almost certainly results in an
1120: overestimate of the total amount of molecular gas in these
1121: galaxies. Adopting the same conversion factor as used in this paper
1122: would give a gas-to-dust ratio of 90 for the data in
1123: \citet{sanders91}, somewhat smaller than the ratio obtained here.
1124:
1125: The extremely low values seen for Arp 55 and, to some
1126: extent, for UGC 5101 and Mrk 231 may be due to a significant contribution
1127: to the 880 $\mu$m flux from non-thermal or radio free-free emission.
1128: However, Arp 55(NE)
1129: shows no evidence for a central AGN that could be a source
1130: of non-thermal emission (see Appendix).
1131: There is some
1132: evidence to suggest that UGC 5101 contains a buried AGN (see
1133: Appendix), which could increase the 880 $\mu$m flux and lead
1134: to a small overestimate in the dust mass and an underestimate
1135: of the gas-to-dust ratio.
1136: Mrk 231 is the one galaxy in our sample for which a dominant
1137: AGN contribution has been identified previously at millimeter wavelengths
1138: \citep{ds98}; it is possible that we have underestimated the contribution
1139: from the AGN at 880 $\mu$m in our calculations.
1140: Mrk 273, Arp 299, NGC 6240, and NGC 2623 have all been identified as
1141: containing an AGN from X-ray data
1142: \citep{x02,z03,k03,m03}; however, the contribution of
1143: non-thermal emission from the AGN at millimeter wavelengths appears
1144: to be small (see Appendix).
1145:
1146: Extremely high values for the gas-to-dust ratio are measured
1147: for NGC 6240, VV 114, and NGC 1614.
1148: For NGC 6240, the very broad CO emission line
1149: reduces the bandwidth available to measure the continuum flux and produces
1150: a large uncertainty in the flux. In addition, the CO J=3-2 emission
1151: may be moderately optically thin \citep{d07}, which could result in
1152: the gas mass being overestimated.
1153: VV 114 and NGC 1614 are some of the nearest galaxies in
1154: our sample and, along with Arp 299, are the only ones for which large
1155: amounts of missing flux
1156: produce negative bowls in the CO J=3-2 maps. Because these galaxies are
1157: relatively nearby, the SMA has greater sensitivity to low surface
1158: density gas that is likely to be spatially extended than it would have
1159: in some of our more distant
1160: galaxies. Figures~\ref{fig-VV114co32} and \ref{fig-NGC1614co32}
1161: show that the CO-emitting regions in these
1162: galaxies are quite extended;
1163: however, the dust continuum
1164: emission does not appear to be significantly extended in these three galaxies.
1165: The compact nature of the dust emission suggests that the SMA data are not
1166: sufficiently sensitive to pick up continuum emission from dust outside
1167: the peak central concentration. In addition, the continuum data suffer
1168: slightly more from the missing flux problem than the spectral line
1169: data do (\S~\ref{missing} and Tables~\ref{tbl-co32} and~\ref{tbl-cont}) because the line
1170: emission is intrinsically more compact in an individual spectral channel.
1171:
1172: An examination of the relative
1173: strengths of the CO J=3-2 emission and the 880 $\mu$m emission suggests
1174: that this is a reasonable explanation. For example, if the gas-to-dust
1175: mass ratio were 150,
1176: then, using the equations for dust and gas
1177: masses given above, we would expect the flux in the CO J=3-2 moment map
1178: to be roughly 10$^4$ times brighter (in Jy km s$^{-1}$) than the
1179: flux in the 880 $\mu$m map (in Jy). For NGC 1614 and Arp 299, if we
1180: compare the two maps using contours scaled by this factor of 10$^4$,
1181: we see a very
1182: similar extent and relative strength in the CO J=3-2 and 880 $\mu$m
1183: maps. For VV 114, the central and western peaks
1184: are similar in extent and relative strength in the CO J=3-2 and 880 $\mu$m
1185: maps. However, the
1186: eastern peak is fainter
1187: in 880 $\mu$m continuum than we would expect by a factor of about two,
1188: which suggests that either the gas-to-dust ratio or some other
1189: property of the gas and dust (such as CO emissivity or temperature) is
1190: different in this region.
1191:
1192: \subsection{Gas and Dust Masses in the Central Kiloparsec}
1193:
1194: The previous discussion combined with
1195: the large range in the gas-to-dust mass ratios seen in
1196: Table~\ref{tbl-dustmass} led us to examine the gas-to-dust ratio
1197: using a single resolution element to probe the
1198: most central region of each galaxy or galaxy component. For
1199: these calculations, we compared the H$_2$ mass calculated from
1200: the integrated CO J=3-2 intensity in a single beam at the peak of
1201: the emission with the peak 880 $\mu$m continuum intensity
1202: (Table~\ref{tbl-dustmasspeak}). Note that
1203: since many of the continuum sources are not resolved, the peak
1204: continuum emission given in Table~\ref{tbl-dustmasspeak} has the
1205: same value as the integrated flux given in Table~\ref{tbl-fluxes}.
1206:
1207: The average gas-to-dust ratio including all 15 galaxies or galaxy
1208: components with continuum detections in Table~\ref{tbl-dustmasspeak} is
1209: $120 \pm 28$ (rms deviation 109). This value is smaller
1210: than the average value obtained from the values in
1211: Table~\ref{tbl-dustmass} (i.e., using the total mass
1212: detected with the SMA data) and agrees somewhat
1213: better with the typical Milky Way
1214: gas-to-dust ratio. Perhaps more importantly, the dispersion about
1215: the mean value is smaller by about a factor of two when only the
1216: peak values are used, which suggests some of the dispersion seen in
1217: the integrated values can be attributed to the better mass sensitivity of
1218: the CO observations (see previous section).
1219:
1220: %NGC 1614 stands out as having a particularly large gas-to-dust ratio. This
1221: %galaxy is one for which we have made a large correction for a
1222: %non-thermal or free-free
1223: %component based on the relative strengths of the 880 $\mu$m and
1224: %1.3 mm continuum emission. Since there is no previous evidence for an AGN
1225: %in this galaxy (see Appendix), the gas-to-dust ratio in this galaxy must
1226: %be considered to be more uncertain. If we calculate the average
1227: %gas-to-dust ratio excluding NGC 1614, we obtain
1228: %$169 \pm 34$ (standard deviation 117), a value which is in excellent
1229: %agreement with the Milky Way gas-to-dust ratio.
1230:
1231: Thus our new SMA data suggest that the gas-to-dust mass ratio in
1232: the central kiloparsec of these luminous and ultraluminous infrared
1233: galaxies is very similar to the gas-to-dust ratio measured in
1234: the Milky Way. This result is somewhat surprising given that the
1235: dust in these nuclear regions is subject to more intense heating
1236: (as well as perhaps processing due to shocks) compared to typical
1237: regions in the Milky Way. Perhaps the main zone of activity is very
1238: compact and so does not dominate the energetics of the ISM in the
1239: entire central kiloparsec; this could be tested by sub-arcsec
1240: resolution observations in a direct star formation
1241: tracer. Alternatively, perhaps most of the gas and dust reside in high
1242: column density clouds or cores that help to shield much of the mass
1243: from external heating.
1244: %In any case, this evidence for normal dust
1245: %properties in these luminous and ultraluminous infrared galaxies helps
1246: %to place the study of dust emission in high redshift galaxies on
1247: %a firmer footing.
1248:
1249:
1250: \subsection{Possible Variations in Gas and Dust Properties}
1251:
1252: The normal gas-to-dust ratio seen in these galaxies provides additional
1253: validation for the CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor derived by \citet{ds98}
1254: and adopted in this analysis.
1255: In this section, we check for any
1256: systematic differences in the gas-to-dust ratio among the galaxies in
1257: our sample that may point to differences in
1258: the interstellar medium properties.
1259: Our overall picture
1260: is one in which the formation and heating of dust tracks the location of
1261: molecular gas, regardless of whether that gas is distributed largely in
1262: discrete virialized clouds (as in the Galaxy) or to a large extent in a
1263: diffuse intracloud medium (as in ULIRGs, where the CO-to-H2 conversion
1264: factor is consequently lower).
1265: We might expect there to be some differences in our sample, which
1266: spans a factor of ten in infrared luminosity and
1267: exhibits nuclear separations from less than 1 kpc (if multiple nuclei
1268: are seen at all) to 20 kpc.
1269: %from 32 to 43 K in dust temperature.
1270: Relatively undisturbed galaxies with a larger nuclear separation are
1271: more likely to have a normal interstellar medium with a more normal
1272: CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor, which would increase the gas mass
1273: and the gas-to-dust ratio.
1274:
1275: Among the fourteen objects in our sample are five systems in which the two
1276: progenitor galaxies can still be clearly distinguished
1277: (Arp 299, Arp 55, VV 114, NGC 5331, NGC 5257/8), while the remaining
1278: nine objects show a single nucleus or a pair of nuclei separated by
1279: less than 1 kpc. If we calculate the gas-to-dust ratio in the central
1280: kiloparsec for the extended and the compact galaxies separately, we find
1281: no significant difference between the two samples. If we divide the sample
1282: as a function of luminosity, we find that the average gas-to-dust ratio
1283: calculated for the lower-luminosity galaxies (160-180 depending on
1284: where we divide the sample) is roughly three times larger
1285: than the gas-to-dust ratio for the more luminous galaxies (50-70).
1286: Thus, there appears to
1287: be a strong dependence of the central gas-to-dust ratio on infrared
1288: luminosity in our
1289: sample, but not on nuclear separation.
1290:
1291: These nominally
1292: discrepant ratios are in fact compatible with a reasonably uniform
1293: gas-to-dust ratio of $\sim 100-150$ once plausible corrections are
1294: made.
1295: We consider here simply changes to the
1296: CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor, how the dust temperature
1297: is derived (optically thick versus optically thin),
1298: and the origin of the submillimeter luminosity. We do not
1299: consider varying the absolute value of the dust emissivity, $\kappa$,
1300: since this is relatively poorly constrained in any case.
1301: Since the less luminous galaxies show on average good agreement with
1302: the Milky Way's gas-to-dust ratio, we focus on possible changes to our analysis
1303: that could increase the gas-to-dust ratio in the more luminous galaxies.
1304:
1305: One possibility is that the dust temperature is underestimated by our
1306: optically thin models and that in fact a higher dust temperature,
1307: such as those derived
1308: by \citet{s97}, is more appropriate. Using the optically
1309: thick dust temperatures would raise the gas-to-dust ratio in these galaxies
1310: by about a factor of two. A second possibility is that there is significant
1311: non-thermal or free-free emission contaminating the 880 $\mu$m flux.
1312: This is
1313: difficult to quantify but would also act to raise the gas-to-dust ratio.
1314: There can
1315: be a significant contribution to the far-infrared luminosity from a
1316: buried AGN and this
1317: contribution can increase with increasing $L_{\rm FIR}$ \citep{t01}.
1318: Assuming tha tthe AGN also contributes significant emission at 880 $\mu$m,
1319: this effect has the right sense to explain the trend of the
1320: gas-to-dust ratio with $L_{\rm FIR}$. In contrast,
1321: adopting a larger value for the CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor (to bring
1322: it closer to the value in normal spiral galaxies) would also
1323: increase the gas-to-dust ratio, but
1324: would not be consistent with previous studies of
1325: these extremely luminous galaxies.
1326:
1327:
1328: % Aug 22: kept this next bit for a record, kind of to show how it is
1329: % possible to explain ANYTHING given enough variables and a bit of cleverness
1330:
1331: %The five most luminous galaxies already
1332: %agree with a gas-to-dust ratio of 100-150, and so no changes to the CO-to-H$_2$
1333: %conversion factor or how the dust temperature is derived are
1334: %required. The three intermediate luminosity galaxies with relatively
1335: %close nuclear separations have a gas-to-dust ratio that is 2-3 times
1336: %larger. If the IRAS emission is optically
1337: %thin in these galaxies with $\beta = 1.5$, then the gas-to-dust
1338: %ratio would decrease by a factor of 1.8 for Arp299 and 1.6 for
1339: %Arp193 and VV 114, which would bring the average gas-to-dust ratio
1340: %for these galaxies down to $\sim 170$, similar to our target value.
1341: %Finally, the three galaxies with wide nuclear separations
1342: %have a ratio that is
1343: %2-3 times smaller than the target gas-to-dust ratio. If the optically
1344: %thin dust temperature calculation is correct for their more compact
1345: %cousins, these galaxies should also have lower dust temperatures, which
1346: %would further decrease their gas-to-dust ratio by a factor of 1.5.
1347: %However, these galaxies are the most likely systems to have a more
1348: %normal CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor. For example, for
1349: %the nearby merger NGC 4038/39,
1350: %\citet{w03} found that a Galactic conversion factor was appropriate
1351: %for most of the molecular complexes. Adopting the Milky Way value
1352: %of the CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor would increase the gas-to-dust
1353: %ratio by a factor of five, which would bring it into good agreement
1354: %with our target value.
1355:
1356:
1357: \section{Correlations between gas and dust properties in the sample\label{sec-corr}}
1358:
1359: \subsection{Testing for correlations}
1360:
1361: We have searched for correlations among the gas and dust properties in
1362: the galaxies in our sample.
1363: The physical and observational quantities that were considered were:
1364: far-infrared luminosity;
1365: dust temperature;
1366: the peak H$_2$ surface density derived from the CO J=3-2 emission;
1367: CO J=3-2 beam area;
1368: total H$_2$ gas mass derived from the CO J=3-2 emission detected with the SMA;
1369: the ratio of the far-infrared luminosity to the total H$_2$ mass;
1370: the ratio of the far-infrared luminosity to the peak H$_2$ mass;
1371: the peak gas-to-dust mass ratio;
1372: and the CO J=3-2/2-1 line ratio
1373: measured from the total flux detected with the SMA.
1374: This list includes both physical quantities associated with the star
1375: formation and ISM properties as well as properties of the sample (such
1376: as beam area and distance) that may introduce selection effects.
1377: We note that the CO J=3-2/2-1 line ratio could be underestimated if
1378: the SMA maps resolve out a larger fraction of the flux in the higher
1379: frequency line.
1380: We also note that the peak H$_2$ surface density may be underestimated
1381: in IRAS 17208-0014, which has a bright unresolved core, and also
1382: somewhat underestimated in six galaxies (Mrk 231, Mrk 273, IC 694 (Arp
1383: 299), Arp 55 NE, Arp 193, and NGC 2623) for which the CO emission is
1384: resolved along the long axis but only slightly extended relative to
1385: the beam along the short axis of emission.
1386: %For the correlations involving the gas-to-dust mass
1387: %ratio, only galaxies with continuum detections were included.
1388: We calculated the correlations using the method described in
1389: \citet{as96} to correct for any distance biases in our sample.
1390:
1391: We identified eleven correlations that are statistically significant
1392: at the 95\% confidence level or better ($ p \le 0.05$,
1393: where $p$ is the probability of a false correlation after
1394: removing the effect of distance;
1395: Table~\ref{tbl-corr}):
1396: far-infrared luminosity and peak H$_2$ surface density;
1397: far-infrared luminosity and dust temperature;
1398: dust temperature and peak H$_2$ surface density;
1399: beam area and peak H$_2$ surface density;
1400: CO J=3-2/2-1 line ratio and beam area;
1401: CO J=3-2/2-1 line ratio and total H$_2$ mass detected with the SMA;
1402: and
1403: the ratio of the far-infrared luminosity to the total H$_2$ mass
1404: detected with the SMA
1405: with each of far-infrared luminosity, dust temperature, beam area,
1406: CO J=3-2/2-1 line ratio, and
1407: the ratio of the far-infrared luminosity to the peak H$_2$ mass.
1408: %However,
1409: %the correlation of surface density with beam area becomes consistent
1410: %with a null correlation if we remove
1411: %the two galaxies in our sample with the most deviant spatial
1412: %resolution (NGC 5257 and Arp 299).
1413: However, the correlation of surface density with beam area becomes
1414: consistent with a null correlation if we use only the twelve galaxies
1415: for which the linear resolution of the beam lies between 0.5 and 1.1
1416: kpc, e.g., excluding NGC 5257 and Arp 299.
1417: In addition, all five of the correlations with
1418: the ratio of the far-infrared luminosity to the total H$_2$ mass
1419: become consistent with a null correlation if we remove NGC 5257
1420: or Arp 299 from the data set. Thus, we conclude that
1421: these five correlations are less robust.
1422: The remaining five correlations are all significant at the 99\%
1423: confidence
1424: level except for far-infrared luminosity with dust temperature, which
1425: is significant at the 98\% confidence level; however, this
1426: correlation is well known from previous studies with larger samples
1427: \citep{soifer89}.
1428: Plots of these pairs of quantities are shown in
1429: Figures~\ref{fig-correlations} and~\ref{fig-bad_correlations}.
1430:
1431: The correlations of peak H$_2$ surface density with the far-infrared
1432: luminosity and dust temperature suggest that galaxies with higher
1433: gas surface densities are more rapidly producing hot young stars,
1434: which in turn heat the gas and dust more efficiently.
1435: This correlation is consistent with the observed systematic correlation
1436: of the HCN luminosity (which traces dense gas mass) with $L_{\rm FIR}$
1437: \citep{gs04}.
1438: The far-infrared luminosity can be used to estimate the
1439: star formation rate \citep{k98}, although there can also
1440: be a significant contribution from a buried AGN \citep{t01}.
1441: Thus, this correlation suggests that higher
1442: star formation rates and/or AGN activity
1443: are associated with higher gas surface densities
1444: inside the central kiloparsec. (Note that this conclusion is somewhat different
1445: from the correlation between
1446: star formation efficiencies and gas surface densities seen by
1447: \citet{s91} and discussed
1448: in \S~\ref{sec-scov}.)
1449: Interestingly, the total H$_2$ mass
1450: detected with the SMA does not correlate with the far-infrared
1451: luminosity in our sample, although this may be partly due to the
1452: limited range of $L_{\rm FIR}$ in our sample (see \citet{i08} for a
1453: discussion of this correlation in the context of a larger sample
1454: including high-redshift galaxies.)
1455: This lack of correlation suggests that it is the concentration of gas
1456: into the central regions that is important for generating the high
1457: star formation rates seen in these merging and merger-remnant
1458: galaxies, rather than the total amount of fuel available
1459: on somewhat larger scales.
1460: This result suggests that the increased star formation rate
1461: and/or AGN activity inferred for
1462: the more luminous infrared galaxies is primarily a result of the
1463: increased availability of fuel for star formation in the central
1464: kiloparsec.
1465:
1466: The CO J=3-2/2-1 line ratio has been used as an indicator of temperature
1467: in the molecular gas \citep{w97}. However, for the galaxies in our
1468: sample, there is no obvious correlation between this ratio and
1469: the dust temperature derived from the 60 and 100 $\mu$m IRAS
1470: data. One possible reason for this lack of correlation is that
1471: the derived dust temperatures are based on global measurements while
1472: the CO J=3-2/2-1 line ratio traces material more concentrated to the
1473: center.
1474: The line ratio does correlate with both
1475: the total molecular gas mass and the beam area
1476: (Fig~\ref{fig-correlations}). We can think of no obvious
1477: physical reason
1478: why the line ratio should correlate with the beam area, and so this
1479: may be produced by better sensitivity (particularly important for the
1480: CO 3-2 line) in the lower resolution
1481: data. A similar effect could produce the correlation with total mass,
1482: although it could also be hinting at a temperature dependence in the
1483: CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor, which would affect the derived mass.
1484: We do not detect
1485: $^{13}$CO J=2-1 emission from enough of our galaxies to make
1486: similar correlation plots involving this line. We will present an
1487: analysis of the various CO line ratios, both integrated and spatially
1488: resolved, in combination with radiative transfer models in a future paper.
1489:
1490:
1491: \subsection{Does the central gas surface density correlate
1492: with $L_{\rm FIR}/M_{\rm H_2}$?\label{sec-scov}}
1493:
1494: %\citet{s91} found that the central gas surface density increased
1495: %as the ratio of far-infrared luminosity to nuclear
1496: %gas mass increased. However, our data do not show any evidence of a similar
1497: %correlation (Figure~\ref{fig-sigma_L/M}).
1498: %Since this trend has been interpreted as indicating
1499: %that higher star formation efficiencies are produced by higher
1500: %gas surface densities, it is worth examining further the possible
1501: %explanations for the disagreement between these two results.
1502:
1503: \citet{s91} found that the central gas surface density
1504: increased as the ratio of far-infrared luminosity to nuclear gas mass
1505: increased. The far-infrared luminosity is a good tracer of
1506: the star formation rate \citep{k98}; thus, if most of the far-infrared
1507: luminosity occurs in the central regions, then this
1508: ratio traces the star formation efficiency of the central, high
1509: density starburst. \citet{s91} interpreted the observed
1510: trend as indicating that higher star formation efficiencies are
1511: produced by higher gas surface densities. However, our data do not
1512: show any evidence of a similar correlation
1513: (Figure~\ref{fig-sigma_L/M}) and so it is
1514: worth examining further the possible explanations for the
1515: disagreement between these two results.
1516:
1517: \citet{s91} adopted a standard CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor and
1518: so their gas surface densities can be expected to be a factor
1519: of six higher and their infrared luminosity to H$_2$ mass
1520: ratios a factor of six lower than our values. However, this
1521: would only shift the absolute scale of their correlation and
1522: not change the correlation itself. Indeed, when we estimate their
1523: relationship and correct for the different gas masses, we find that
1524: it agrees well with the location of most of the points in our
1525: analysis (Figure~\ref{fig-sigma_L/M}).
1526: \citet{s91} used the CO J=1-0
1527: transition in their study, which is more sensitive to cooler,
1528: more spatially extended emission than is the CO J=3-2 transition
1529: used here. However, by isolating the nuclear emission from any more
1530: extended emission, \citet{s91} may have mitigated the contribution
1531: of any extended disk gas in their study.
1532:
1533: An
1534: additional issue worth considering is the possibility of different sample
1535: selection or observational biases.
1536: Our galaxy sample spans a slightly
1537: smaller range of central gas surface density
1538: (a factor of 60) than does the sample in \citet{s91},
1539: which had a range of a factor of 100. However, our range of
1540: surface density drops to only a factor of 10 if the galaxy with the
1541: poorest spatial resolution (NGC 5257) is removed from the sample.
1542: On the other hand, some of the large
1543: range in \citet{s91} may be due to the range of spatial resolution discussed
1544: below.
1545: The sample in \citet{s91} has a factor of 10 larger range in
1546: $L_{\rm FIR}$ and a factor of 5 larger range in the nuclear or peak
1547: gas mass. However,
1548: the net result is that the range of $L_{\rm FIR}/M_{\rm H_2}$ (a factor of 10) is
1549: similar in the two studies
1550: (although the range in our sample drops to a factor of only 4 if we
1551: remove NGC 6240).
1552: \citet{s91} calculated this ratio using only the gas mass
1553: in the central nuclear source that was also used to calculate the
1554: gas surface density, % *** I assume this is right 19/2/2008
1555: while we have used the peak H$_2$ mass in the central
1556: beam, which would be a difference in the method if many of the sources
1557: in the \citet{s91} sample were spatially resolved. However,
1558: most of the sources in the \citet{s91} sample appear to have been
1559: unresolved in the original data sets, which implies that
1560: the method used to calculate the surface density and
1561: the $L_{\rm FIR}/M_{\rm H_2}$ ratio is very similar in this paper
1562: and in \citet{s91}. % *** I assume this is right 19/2/2008
1563:
1564: \citet{s91}
1565: used CO J=1-0 data for a sample of 14 galaxies, including
1566: 5 galaxies from our sample, with resolutions ranging from 0.1 to 3.2
1567: kpc. Although their {\it range} of resolution is similar to that of the
1568: sample presented here, the {\it distribution} of resolutions
1569: is much broader than for our data set, where
1570: all but two galaxies (Arp 299 and NGC 5257/8)
1571: have resolutions between 0.7 and 1.1 kpc.
1572: This distribution of resolutions might introduce systematic effects into
1573: the analysis of \citet{s91} in the sense that galaxies observed with better
1574: angular resolutions could have higher gas surface densities.
1575: Indeed, the average resolution for the seven galaxies at the high
1576: end of the correlation is 0.66 kpc, while the average resolution for the
1577: remaining seven galaxies is 1.14 kpc.
1578:
1579: To examine the effect of resolution further, we looked at the five galaxies
1580: that are common to both samples (Arp 299/IC694,
1581: IRAS 17208-0014, Arp 55, VV 114, and NGC 1614). The values of surface
1582: density and $L_{\rm FIR}/M_{\rm H_2}$ ratio are very similar for Arp 299
1583: and NGC 1614, which are two galaxies for which the angular resolutions of
1584: the CO J=1-0 and the CO J=3-2 data agree within a factor of two. Both
1585: IRAS 17208-0014 and VV 114 move to higher surface densities
1586: and $L_{\rm FIR}/M_{\rm H_2}$ ratios using the CO J=3-2 data, which have
1587: angular resolutions a factor of 2-3 better than the CO J=1-0 data.
1588: The most dramatic change is for Arp 55, for which the CO J=3-2 data have
1589: a factor of 8 better angular resolution: its surface density and
1590: $L_{\rm FIR}/M_{\rm H_2}$ ratio increase dramatically, to the point where it is
1591: larger in both quantities than NGC 1614.
1592:
1593: %This effect could be mitigated somewhat by the fact that
1594: %\citet{s91} used deconvolved source sizes in calculating the
1595: %gas surface density, rather than beam sizes as we have used here. However,
1596: %the sources are not typically much larger than the beam used to observe
1597: %them, and thus the deconvolved sizes may be biased by the resolution
1598: %used to observe the galaxy.
1599:
1600: In summary, the better uniformity in angular resolution in our
1601: sample compared to that of \citet{s91} gives us confidence that
1602: the lack of correlation seen between the peak H$_2$ surface density
1603: and the ratio of infrared luminosity to H$_2$ mass seen in our
1604: analysis is a real effect
1605: and not an artifact of our sample selection or observing techniques.
1606: While such a correlation may exist for galaxies with lower
1607: far-infrared luminosities (below the luminosity cutoff of our
1608: sample), it cannot help us in understanding
1609: the high star formation rates in the luminous systems studied here.
1610: The data presented here imply a star formation rate
1611: (\S~\ref{sec-corr}), not a star
1612: formation efficiency, that increases with the central gas surface density.
1613: We will explore these interesting correlations further in a future paper.
1614:
1615: \section{Conclusions}
1616:
1617: In this paper, we have
1618: presented new data obtained with the Submillimeter Array
1619: for a sample of fourteen luminous and ultraluminous infrared
1620: galaxies selected to have distances $D_L < 200$ Mpc and
1621: far-infrared luminosities $\log L_{\rm FIR} > 11.4$.
1622: We have obtained data
1623: in the CO J=3-2, CO J=2-1, $^{13}$CO J=2-1,
1624: and HCO$^+$ J=4-3 lines as well as continuum data at
1625: 880 $\mu$m and 1.3 mm with spatial resolutions of order 1 kpc
1626: or better in all but one of the target galaxies. We present
1627: integrated intensity, velocity field, and velocity dispersion maps
1628: for the $^{12}$CO lines, integrated intensity maps for
1629: the continuum, $^{13}$CO, and HCO$^+$ lines, and peak and integrated
1630: spectra for all the detected lines.
1631:
1632: We have compared our CO J=3-2 and 880 $\mu$m continuum fluxes detected
1633: with the SMA with published, archival, and new data from the
1634: James Clerk Maxwell Telescope. This comparison shows that
1635: the interferometric data miss a significant fraction
1636: (typically 50\%) of the
1637: CO J=3-2 emission for eight of the galaxies in our sample
1638: and also a significant fraction (typically 50-80\%) of
1639: the continuum flux for nine of the galaxies.
1640: This large amount of missing continuum
1641: flux suggests that
1642: a significant fraction of the 880 $\mu$m emission
1643: in these systems occurs on
1644: moderately large spatial scales.
1645: The good agreement between the percentage of missing flux seen in
1646: the CO J=3-2 line and the 880 $\mu$m continuum suggests that the missing
1647: continuum flux comes from dust emission associated with molecular
1648: gas in the more extended disks of the galaxies.
1649:
1650: We have combined our CO and continuum data to determine the
1651: gas-to-dust mass ratio in the central regions of these galaxies.
1652: We adopt the smaller value of the CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor from
1653: \citet{ds98} and calculate the dust temperature by fitting a modified
1654: blackbody function as in \citet{k01}.
1655: Because of the lower signal-to-noise ratio in the continuum data,
1656: we find that we obtain more consistent measurements of the gas-to-dust
1657: mass ratio if we use a single beam to probe the central region of each
1658: galaxy or galaxy component. We find an average gas-to-dust mass
1659: ratio of $120 \pm 28$ (rms deviation 109), very similar to the
1660: value of 150 determined for the Milky Way. This similarity between
1661: the gas-to-dust ratio in these luminous systems and that in the Milky
1662: Way is somewhat surprising, given that the dust is subject to more
1663: intense heating from the starburst and possibly accretion activity
1664: compared to typical regions in the Milky Way.
1665:
1666: We have searched for correlations among nine
1667: physical and observational quantities
1668: for the galaxies in our sample. We find five correlations that appear
1669: to be statistically significant as well as robust to small changes in
1670: the exact galaxy sample. The most interesting correlation is
1671: that of peak H$_2$ surface density with the far-infrared
1672: luminosity. Since the far-infrared luminosity
1673: can be used to estimate the star formation rate,
1674: these correlations suggest that galaxies with higher gas surface
1675: densities inside the central kiloparsec have a higher star formation rate.
1676: We do not see a significant correlation of total H$_2$ mass with
1677: the far-infrared luminosity, which suggests that the increase
1678: in star formation rate is due to the increased availability of
1679: molecular gas as fuel for star formation in the central regions,
1680: rather than the total amount of gas available on somewhat larger scales.
1681:
1682: Our data do not show any evidence of a significant correlation between
1683: central gas surface density and the ratio of far-infrared luminosity
1684: to nuclear gas mass. This lack of correlation is different from
1685: the results of \citet{s91}, who interpreted their observed correlation as
1686: indicating that higher star formation efficiencies result from higher
1687: gas surface densities. We suggest that the correlation seen by
1688: \citet{s91} was produced by the wider distribution of spatial
1689: resolutions in their data set and is not an intrinsic property of
1690: these very luminous galaxies. To reiterate, our new data show that
1691: it is star formation {\it rate}, not star formation {\it efficiency},
1692: that increases with the central gas surface density in luminous and
1693: ultraluminous infrared galaxies
1694:
1695: There are a number of additional papers in preparation or planning
1696: that will present more detailed analysis of various aspects of the data.
1697: We will compare the results from
1698: this survey with similar observations of high-redshift
1699: submillimeter galaxies to study the gas properties of a wide range of
1700: luminous galaxies using the CO J=3-2 line to trace the molecular gas
1701: content \citep{i08}.
1702: A detailed analysis of the molecular gas properties of NGC 6240 has
1703: already been presented in \citet{i07};
1704: we will
1705: present similar detailed analyses of the gas, dust, and star formation
1706: properties individual
1707: galaxies such as VV 114 \citep{p08} and Arp 299.
1708: We will
1709: examine the physical properties of the molecular gas for the entire
1710: sample using
1711: spatially resolved radiative transfer models, similar to what has been
1712: done for NGC6240 \citep{i07}, as well as carry out dynamical analysis
1713: and modeling of the galaxies, both of which can give an independent
1714: estimate of the CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor, similar to the analysis
1715: of \citet{ds98}.
1716: This physical analysis will also allow us
1717: to place constraints on the origin of the OH megamaser activity
1718: in luminous infrared galaxies \citep{darling07}.
1719: We will combine our high-resolution SMA data with
1720: {\it Spitzer} data to compare the properties of the warm and cold dust
1721: \citep[see also][]{a07,m07}.
1722: Finally, we will make detailed comparisons between
1723: the molecular gas and dust properties of these U/LIRGs and the
1724: predictions of numerical simulations of merging galaxies
1725: \citep[e.g.,][]{c06,c07}.
1726:
1727: \acknowledgments
1728:
1729: The Submillimeter Array is a joint project between the Smithsonian
1730: Astrophysical Observatory and the Academia Sinica Institute of Astronomy
1731: and Astrophysics and is funded by the Smithsonian Institution and the
1732: Academia Sinica.
1733: The James Clerk Maxwell Telescope is operated by The Joint Astronomy
1734: Centre on behalf of the Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council
1735: of the United Kingdom, the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research,
1736: and the National Research Council of Canada.
1737: This research has made use of the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED)
1738: which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute
1739: of Technology, under contract with the National Aeronautics and Space
1740: Administration.
1741: We are grateful to the many SMA observers who helped to take the
1742: data presented in this paper and to the SMA TAC for giving this
1743: project a high priority.
1744: We thank James di Francesco for
1745: making available to us the pipeline processed archival SCUBA data
1746: for VV 114, NGC 5331, and Arp 299, Padelis Papadopoulos for access to
1747: his single dish CO data, and the anonymous referee for a very useful
1748: and prompt referee report. C.D.W. and J.G. acknowledge support by the
1749: Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC).
1750: A.J.B. acknowledges support by National Science
1751: Foundation grant AST-0708653. M.J. acknowledges support by the Academy of
1752: Finland grant 124620.
1753:
1754: {\it Facilities:} \facility{SMA}, \facility{JCMT}.
1755:
1756: \appendix
1757:
1758: \section{Discussion of individual galaxies}
1759:
1760: %So far this section just has info on whether the source has an AGN or not
1761: %and some details of the dust mass calculation, if needed.
1762:
1763: % may eventually need to edit these discussions to include possibility of
1764: % free-free emission, where appropriate; leave for now 19/02/2008
1765:
1766: \subsection{IRAS 17208-0014}
1767: % no other common names
1768:
1769: \citet{v95} classify the optical spectrum of IRAS 17208-0014 as HII.
1770: High-resolution near-infrared imaging shows no direct evidence
1771: of an AGN, as the nuclear emission is extended in all bands
1772: \citep{sco00}. The [NeV] line, which is an indicator of an AGN, is not
1773: detected in this galaxy \citep{f07}.
1774: High-resolution radio imaging at 4.8 GHz also shows
1775: no evidence for an AGN \citep{bk06}.
1776: % but I don't understand how these guys did their classification ...
1777: Near-infrared images
1778: show extended emission with a brighter nucleus
1779: \citep{sco00}.
1780:
1781: However, the millimeter continuum fluxes in Table~\ref{tbl-fluxes} suggest
1782: there may be a significant non-thermal or free-free component present. The 880
1783: $\mu$m and 1.4 mm continuum fluxes are inconsistent with dust with
1784: $\beta$ = 1.5 at greater than the 1.5$\sigma$ level even after
1785: including 20\% calibration uncertainties.
1786: If we assume
1787: that any nonthermal component
1788: depends inversely on frequency \citep{condon92} while the dust component
1789: varies as $\nu^{3.5}$ (dust emissivity $\beta = 1.5$), then the
1790: non-thermal emission would contribute 40\% of the flux
1791: at 880 $\mu$m.
1792:
1793: \subsection{Mrk 231 (UGC 8058, VII Zw 490)}
1794:
1795: Mrk 231 is the only object in our sample to show strong emission
1796: from an AGN. \citet{v95} classify the optical spectrum as Seyfert 2,
1797: while \citet{g98} suggest an AGN-like radiation field based on
1798: mid-infrared emission lines and limits. \citet{s98} suggest an AGN
1799: based on their 22 GHz VLA data; \citet{l03} find that VLBI
1800: imaging data are most consistent with an AGN morphology, although
1801: they point out that the AGN may not be responsible for the majority
1802: of the bolometric luminosity of the galaxy. However, \citet{d04} find
1803: that the nuclear starburst contributes 25-40\% of the bolometric luminosity.
1804: Mrk 231 also
1805: contains a hard X-ray source that is variable on timescales of a few
1806: hours \citep{g02}.
1807:
1808: The millimeter continuum fluxes in Table~\ref{tbl-fluxes} suggest
1809: there is a significant non-thermal component present. \citet{ds98}
1810: attributed all but 20\% of their 1.3 mm continuum flux to
1811: non-thermal emission. If we assume that any nonthermal component
1812: depends inversely on frequency \citep{condon92} while the dust component
1813: varies as $\nu^{3.5}$ (dust emissivity $\beta = 1.5$), then the
1814: non-thermal emission contributes perhaps 25\% of the flux
1815: at 880 $\mu$m.
1816:
1817: \subsection{Mrk 273 (UGC 8696, VV 851, I Zw 71)}
1818:
1819: \citet{v95} classify the optical spectrum of Mrk 273 as LINER.
1820: \citet{g98} suggest that the mid-infrared radiation has equal
1821: contributions from a starburst and an AGN.
1822: \citet{a07} detect both [NeV] emission and continuum emission from
1823: dust hotter than 300 K, both of which indicate the presence of an AGN.
1824: \citet{x02}
1825: detect hard X-ray emission from the northern nucleus, while \citet{p03}
1826: detect the Fe line in X-rays, both
1827: suggesting the presence of an AGN. However, \citet{s98} find that the
1828: compact 22 GHz core can be fit by a model of clustered supernovae.
1829: Near-infrared images
1830: show extended emission with two bright central sources
1831: \citep{sco00}.
1832:
1833: The relative strength of the 1.3 and 2.6 mm continuum emission
1834: \citep{ds98} suggests that some non-thermal emission is present.
1835: However, the contribution at 880 $\mu$m would be small and well within the
1836: 20\% calibration uncertainty of the data.
1837:
1838: \subsection{IRAS 10565+2448} % Melanie and NED gives no more names
1839:
1840: This galaxy has been relatively poorly studied.
1841: \citet{v95} classify the optical spectrum of IRAS 10565+2448 as
1842: HII. \citet{c91} do not find any compact radio continuum peak
1843: at 1.49 GHz.
1844: Near-infrared images
1845: show extended emission with a brighter nucleus
1846: \citep{sco00}.
1847: The [NeV] line, which is an indicator of an AGN, is not
1848: detected in this galaxy \citep{f07}.
1849:
1850: The millimeter continuum data are consistent with pure dust emission,
1851: although the 1.3 mm continuum point is on the large side of what
1852: is possible, leaving open the possibility of a small non-thermal
1853: contribution at 880 $\mu$m.
1854:
1855: \subsection{UGC 5101}
1856: % NED gives no more names
1857:
1858: \citet{v95} classify the optical spectrum of UGC 5101 as LINER.
1859: Although \citet{g98} suggest the mid-infrared radiation field is more
1860: similar to that of a starburst than an AGN,
1861: \citet{a04} find that [NeV] emission implies this source contains
1862: a buried AGN. \citet{a07} detect continuum emission from
1863: dust hotter than 300 K, which also indicates the presence of an AGN.
1864: \citet{i03} detect hard X-ray emission, including
1865: the Fe line, which they interpret as evidence for a buried AGN.
1866: \citet{l03} use VLBI imaging to find that
1867: an AGN is responsible for at least 10\% of the total radio flux.
1868: Near-infrared images
1869: show extended emission with a brighter nucleus
1870: \citep{sco00}.
1871:
1872:
1873: The millimeter continuum data are consistent with pure dust emission,
1874: although the 1.3 mm continuum point is on the large side of what
1875: is possible, leaving open the possibility of a small non-thermal
1876: contribution at 880 $\mu$m.
1877:
1878: \subsection{Arp 299 (VV 118, NGC 3690, Mrk 171, IC 694)}
1879:
1880:
1881: High-resolution radio images from 1.4 to 8.4 GHz reveal five bright
1882: compact sources as well as extended emission \citep{n04}.
1883: The bright compact radio source in the nucleus of IC 694 breaks up
1884: into five candidate radio supernova remnants when observed with
1885: the VLBA; one of the sources may possibly be a low-luminosity
1886: AGN \citep{n04}.
1887: X-ray images reveal a population of compact sources, including sources
1888: in the nucleus of each component which are likely to be AGN
1889: \citep{z03}. Further evidence for an AGN in NGC 3690 comes from
1890: \citet{gm06}, who identify a conical region with Seyfert-like excitation
1891: emanating from the B1 region.
1892: Mid-infrared images show three compact sources
1893: associated with the two nuclei as well as the emission region north of
1894: NGC 3690 \citep{s01}; near-infrared images reveal a fourth compact
1895: source
1896: near NGC3690 as well as extended emission \citep{a00}
1897:
1898: The combination of the 2.6 mm continuum flux from \citet{a97} with
1899: the 1.3 mm continuum flux from this paper suggests that some
1900: non-thermal component may be present in the eastern component (IC694).
1901: If we assume the non-thermal emission scales inversely with
1902: frequency and that all of the 2.6 mm continuum emission is
1903: non-thermal, then any non-thermal contribution at 880 $\mu$m would
1904: be less than 10\% of the total.
1905:
1906: \subsection{Arp 55 (UGC 4881, VV 155)}
1907:
1908: Arp 55 is one of the least studied galaxies in our sample.
1909: \citet{v95} classify the optical spectrum as HII for both
1910: components. \citet{l93}
1911: detected Arp 55 using VLBI observations, but find the source
1912: to be consistent with a compact starburst or a group of
1913: clustered supernova.
1914:
1915: \subsection{Arp 193 (IC 883, VV 821, UGC 8387, I Zw 56)}
1916:
1917: \citet{v95} classify the optical spectrum as LINER.
1918: 8.4 GHz images from the VLA show disk-like extended emission with
1919: no sign of a compact source \citep{c91}.
1920: \citet{rush96} give an upper limit on the soft X-ray luminosity.
1921: Near and
1922: mid-infrared images
1923: also show disk-like extended emission \citep{sco00,s01}.
1924:
1925:
1926: \subsection{NGC 6240 (IC 4625, UGC 10592, VV 617)}
1927:
1928: \citet{v95} classify the optical spectrum as LINER.
1929: However,
1930: hard X-ray imaging has revealed two AGNs separated by $\sim
1931: 1^{\prime\prime}$ \citep{k03}.
1932: \citet{a07} detect continuum emission from
1933: dust hotter than 300 K, which also indicates the presence of an AGN.
1934: High-resolution radio images from 2.3 to 8.4 GHz reveal two
1935: compact radio sources with properties similar to Seyfert nuclei
1936: \citep{gb04}.
1937: Near-infrared images also show two nuclei as well as
1938: bright extended emission
1939: \citep{sco00}.
1940: For a more complete discussion of the multi-wavelength properties of
1941: NGC 6240, see \citet{i07}.
1942:
1943:
1944: \subsection{VV 114 (Arp 236, IC 1623)}
1945:
1946: \citet{v95} classify the optical spectrum as HII for both components.
1947: 8.4 GHz images from the VLA show no sign of a compact source
1948: \citep{c91}. However, \citet{l02} find that the mid-infrared
1949: spectrum shows signs of an AGN in the eastern component.
1950: Near and mid-infrared images
1951: show extended emission in both components with a bright compact source
1952: in the eastern component \citep{sco00,s01}.
1953:
1954: The millimeter continuum data are consistent with pure dust emission,
1955: although the 1.3 mm continuum point for IC694 is on the large side of what
1956: is possible, leaving open the possibility of a small non-thermal
1957: contribution at 880 $\mu$m.
1958:
1959: \subsection{NGC 5331 (UGC 8774, VV 253)}
1960:
1961: % not in V95 or C91
1962:
1963: This galaxy has been relatively poorly studied.
1964: \citet{a95} classify both components as starbursts based on optical
1965: spectroscopy and \citet{rush96} give an upper limit on the soft X-ray
1966: luminosity.
1967: \citet{c90} detect both components at 1.49 GHz, with the
1968: southern component being about twice as strong as the northern component.
1969:
1970:
1971: \subsection{NGC 2623 (Arp 243, UGC 4509)}
1972:
1973: \citet{h83} classify the optical spectrum as LINER.
1974: 8.4 GHz images from the VLA show a strong compact radio source
1975: \citep{c91}. \citet{m03} classified this galaxy as an obscured AGN
1976: using X-ray observations from Chandra. Near and mid-infrared images
1977: show a single compact nucleus \citep{sco00,s01}.
1978:
1979: The combination of the 1.3 mm continuum flux from Table~\ref{tbl-fluxes} with
1980: the 880 $\mu$m continuum flux from this paper suggests that some small
1981: non-thermal component may be present.
1982: If we assume the non-thermal emission scales inversely with
1983: frequency and that the dust emissivity goes as $\beta=1.5$,
1984: then any non-thermal contribution at 880 $\mu$m would
1985: be less than 10\% of the total.
1986:
1987:
1988: \subsection{NGC 5257, NGC 5258 (Arp 240, VV 55, UGC 8641,
1989: UGC 8645)}
1990:
1991: \citet{v95} classify the optical spectrum as HII and \citet{rush96}
1992: give an upper limit on the soft X-ray luminosity of NGC5258.
1993: 8.4 GHz images from the VLA show emission in both components that
1994: is somewhat extended \citep{c91}.
1995: \citet{s07} present Spitzer mid-infrared images at 3.6,
1996: 8, and 24 $\mu$m, which show that the bright arm seen in CO in NGC5258
1997: is also prominent at 24 $\mu$m.
1998:
1999: NGC 5258 is an unusual case in that most of
2000: the CO J=3-2 emission seen by the SMA comes from the bright
2001: southern arm, with only weak emission seen from the nucleus. Surprisingly, this
2002: galaxy contains the strongest continuum source in our entire sample
2003: and is detected at the 6$\sigma$ level despite a relatively high
2004: noise in the SMA image. However, this point source is not located
2005: at the center of the galaxy but rather (-15,8) arcseconds to the
2006: north-west. Thus, the low gas-to-dust ratio seen in Table~\ref{tbl-dustmass}
2007: is most likely spurious.
2008:
2009: \subsection{NGC 1614 (Arp 186, Mrk 617)}
2010:
2011: \citet{v95} classify the optical spectrum of NGC 1614 as HII,
2012: although the [NII] lines suggest a LINER classification.
2013: \citet{n90} find no direct evidence for an AGN component in
2014: their 4.6 GHz maps. \citet{f06} fit the infrared
2015: spectral energy distribution with a type II AGN model; however,
2016: these model fits suggest that starburst emission is likely the
2017: dominant component at 880 $\mu$m. High-resolution radio,
2018: near-infrared, and mid-infrared imaging reveal a starforming ring with
2019: diameter 1.2$^{\prime\prime}$ \citep{s01,a01,n90}.
2020:
2021: NGC 1614 is the only object in our sample besides Mrk 231 to show
2022: clear evidence of a non-thermal component from the ratio of its
2023: millimeter continuum fluxes. The
2024: peak 880 $\mu$m and 1.3 mm continuum fluxes are almost
2025: identical (Tables~\ref{tbl-fluxes} and ~\ref{tbl-dustmasspeak}).
2026: If we assume that any non-thermal component depends inversely
2027: on frequency, then dust emission represents perhaps 60\% of
2028: the total 880 $\mu$m flux and only 40\% of the peak 880 $\mu$m
2029: flux. However, correcting for this putative non-thermal component
2030: produces the highest peak gas-to-dust ratio of any galaxy in
2031: our sample (Table~\ref{tbl-dustmasspeak}).
2032:
2033: \begin{thebibliography}{}
2034: \bibitem[Ashby et al.(1995)]{a95}Ashby, M. L. N., Houck, J. R., \&
2035: Matthews, K. 1995, \apj, 447, 545
2036: \bibitem[Aalto et al.(1997)]{a97} Aalto, S., Radford, S. J. E.,
2037: Scoville, N. Z., \& Sargent, A. I. 1997, \apj, 475, L107
2038: \bibitem[Akritas \& Siebert(1996)]{as96}Akritas, M. G., \& Siebert, J.,
2039: 1996, \mnras, 278, 919
2040: \bibitem[Alonso-Herrero et al.(2000)]{a00}Alonso-Herrero, A.,
2041: Rieke, G. H., Rieke, M. J., \& Scoville, N. Z.,
2042: 2000, \apj, 532, 845
2043: \bibitem[Alonso-Herrero et al.(2001)]{a01}Alonso-Herrero, A.,
2044: Engelbracht, C. W., Rieke, M. J., Rieke, G. H., \&
2045: Quillen, A. C. 2001, \apj, 546, 952
2046: \bibitem[Aretxaga et al.(2003)]{a03}Aretxaga, I., Hughes, D. H.,
2047: Chapin, E. L., Gazta
2048: ~naga, E., Dunlop, J. S., \& Ivison, R. J., 2003, \mnras, 342, 759
2049: \bibitem[Aretxaga et al.(2005)]{a05}Aretxaga, I., Hughes, D. H.,
2050: \& Dunlop, J. S., 2005, \mnras,
2051: 358, 1240
2052: \bibitem[Armus et al.(2004)]{a04}Armus, L. et al., 2004, \apjs, 154, 178
2053: \bibitem[Armus et al.(2007)]{a07}Armus, L. et al., 2007, \apj, 656, 148
2054: \bibitem[Baan \& Kl\"ockner(2006)]{bk06}Baan, W. A., \&
2055: Kl\"ockner, H.-R. 2006, \aap, 449, 559
2056: \bibitem[Blain et al.(2002)]{blai02} Blain, A. W., Smail, I., Ivison, R. J., Kneib, J.-P., \&
2057: Frayer, D. T. 2002, Physics Reports, 369, 111
2058: \bibitem[Braine et al.(2004)]{brai04} Braine, J., Lisenfeld, U., Duc, P.-A., et al.~2004,
2059: \aap, 418, 419
2060: \bibitem[Bryant \& Scoville(1996)]{bs96} Bryant, P. M. \& Scoville, N. Z. 1996, \apj, 457,, 678
2061: \bibitem[Bryant \& Scoville(1999)]{bs99} Bryant, P. M. \& Scoville, N. Z. 1999, \aj, 117, 2632
2062: \bibitem[Carico et al.(1992)]{c92}Carico, D. P., Keene, J., Soifer, B. T.,
2063: \& Neugebauer, G. 1992, \pasp, 104, 1086
2064: \bibitem[Chakrabarti et al.(2007)]{c07}Chakrabarti, S., Cox, T. J.,
2065: Hernquist, L., Hopkins,
2066: P. F., Robertson, B., \& Di Matteo, T., 2007, \apj, 658, 840
2067: \bibitem[Condon et al.(1991)]{c91}Condon, J. J., Huang, Z.-P., Yin, Q. F.,
2068: \& Thuan, T. X. 1991, \apj, 378, 65
2069: \bibitem[Condon et al.(1990)]{c90}Condon, J. J., Helou, G., Sanders,
2070: D. B., Soifer, B. T., 1990, \apjs, 73, 359
2071: \bibitem[Condon(1992)]{condon92}Condon, J. J. 1992, \araa, 30, 575
2072: \bibitem[Conselice et al.(2003)]{cons03} Conselice, C. J., Chapman, S. C.,
2073: \& Windhorst, R. A. 2003, \apj, 596, L5
2074: \bibitem[Cox et al.(2004)]{cox04} Cox, T. J., Primack, J., Jonsson, P.,
2075: \& Somerville, R. S., 2004, ApJ, 607, L87
2076: \bibitem[Cox et al.(2006)]{c06}Cox, T. J., Dutta, S. N., Di Matteo,
2077: T., Hernquist, L., Hopkins,
2078: P. F., Robertson, B., \& Springel, V., 2006, \apj, 650, 791
2079: \bibitem[Dame et al.(2001)]{d01}Dame, T. M., Hartmann, D., \& Thaddeus, P. 2001, \apj, 547, 792
2080: \bibitem[Darling(2007)]{darling07} Darling, J., 2007,
2081: \apj, 572, 810
2082: \bibitem[Darling \& Giovanelli(2002)]{darl02} Darling, J. \& Giovanelli, R.
2083: 2002, \apj, 669, L9
2084: \bibitem[Dasyra et al.(2006)]{d06} Dasyra, K. M., et al., 2006, \apj,
2085: 651, 835
2086: \bibitem[Davies et al.(2004)]{d04} Davies, R. I., Tacconi, L. J.,
2087: \& Genzel, R., 2004, \apj, 613, 781
2088: \bibitem[Di Francesco et al.(2008)]{dF08}Di Francesco, J., Johnstone,
2089: D., Kirk, H., MacKenzie, T., \& Ledwosinska, E.,
2090: 2008, \apjs, 175, 277
2091: \bibitem[Downes \& Solomon(1998)]{ds98}Downes, D., \& Solomon, P.M.
2092: 1998, \apj, 507, 615
2093: \bibitem[Draine \& Lee(1984)]{dl84}Draine, B. T., \& Lee, H. M., 1984,
2094: \apj, 285, 89
2095: \bibitem[Draine et al.(2007)]{d07}Draine, B. T., Dale, D. A, Bendo,
2096: G., et al., 2007, \apj, 663, 866
2097: \bibitem[Dumke et al.(2001)]{dumke01} Dumke, M., Nieten, Ch., Thuma,
2098: G., Wielebinski, R., \& Walsh, W., 2001, \aap, 373, 853
2099: \bibitem[Dunne et al.(2000)]{d00}Dunne, L., Eales, S., Edmunds, M.,
2100: Ivison, R., Alexander, P., \& Clements, D. L. 2000, \mnras, 315, 115
2101: \bibitem[Farrah et al.(2007)]{f07} Farrah, D. et al., 2007, \apj, 667, 149
2102: \bibitem[Frayer et al.(1998)]{fray98} Frayer, D. T., Ivison, R. J.,
2103: Scoville, N. Z., et al.
2104: 1998, \apj, 506, L7
2105: \bibitem[Frayer et al.(1999)]{fray99} Frayer, D. T., Ivison, R. J., Scoville, N. Z., et al.
2106: 1999, \apj, 514, L13
2107: \bibitem[Fritz et al.(2006)]{f06} Fritz, J., Franceschini, A.,
2108: \& Hatziminaoglou, E. 2006, \mnras, 366, 767
2109: \bibitem[Gallagher et al.(2002)]{g02} Gallagher, S. C., Brandt, W. N.,
2110: Chartas, G., Barmire, G. P., \& Sambruna, R. M. 2002, \apj, 569, 655
2111: \bibitem[Galliano et al.(2003)]{g03} Galliano, F., Madden, S. C.,
2112: Jones, A. P., Wilson, C. D., Bernard, J.-P., \& Le Peintre, F.
2113: 2003, \aap, 407, 159
2114: \bibitem[Gallimore \& Beswick(2004)]{gb04}Gallimore, J. F., \&
2115: Beswick, R., 2004, \aj, 127, 239
2116: \bibitem[Gao \& Solomon(2004)]{gs04} Gao, Y. \& Solomon, P. M. 2004,
2117: \apjs, 152, 63
2118: \bibitem[Garc\'ia-Mar\'in et al.(2006)]{gm06} Garc\'ia-Mar\'in, M.,
2119: Colina, L., Arribas, S., Alonso-Herrero, A., \& Mediavilla, E., 2006,
2120: \apj, 650, 850
2121: \bibitem[Genzel et al.(1998)]{g98} Genzel, R. et al. 1998, \apj, 498, 579
2122: \bibitem[Goldreich \& Kwan(1974)]{gk74} Goldreich, P. \& Kwan, J.,
2123: 1974, \apj, 189, 441
2124: \bibitem[Greve et al.(2005)]{grev05} Greve, T. R., Bertoldi, F., Smail, I., et al.~2005,
2125: \mnras, 359, 1165
2126: \bibitem[Graci\'a-Carpio et al.(2006)]{gc06} Graci\'a-Carpio, J.,
2127: Garc\'ia-Burillo, S., Planesas, P., \& Colina, L., 2006, \apj, 640, L135
2128: \bibitem[Greve et al.(2007)]{grev07} Greve, T. R., Papadopoulos,
2129: P. P., Gao, Y., \& Radford, S. J. E., 2007, \apj, submitted
2130: (astro-ph/0610378)
2131: \bibitem[Gottl\"ober et al.(2001)]{gott01} Gottl\"ober, S., Klypin, A., \& Kravtsov, A. V. 2001,
2132: \apj, 546, 223
2133: \bibitem[Heckman et al.(1983)]{h83} Heckman, T. M., van Breugel, W.,
2134: Miley, G. K., \& Butcher, H. R., 1983, \aj, 88, 1077
2135: \bibitem[Henning et al.(1995)]{h95} Henning, Th., Michel, B., \&
2136: Stignienko, R. 1995, Planet. Space Sci., 43, 1333
2137: \bibitem[Higdon et al.(2006)]{h06} Higdon, S. J. U., Armus, L.,
2138: Higdon, J. L., Soifer, B. T., \& Spoon, H. W. W. 2006, \apj, 648, 339
2139: \bibitem[Hinz \& Rieke(2006)]{hr06}Hinz, J. L. \& Rieke, G. H., 2006,
2140: \apj, 646, 872
2141: \bibitem[Ho et al.(2004)]{h04}Ho, P. T. P., Moran, J. M., \& Lo, K. Y., 2004, \apj,
2142: 616, L1
2143: \bibitem[Hughes et al.(1993)]{h93}Hughes, D. H., et al., 1993, \mnras, 263,
2144: 607
2145: \bibitem[Imanishi et al.(2003)]{i03}Imanishi, M., Terashima, Y.,
2146: Anabuki, N., \& Nakagawa, T. 2003, \apj, 596, L167
2147: \bibitem[Imanishi et al.(2006)]{i06}Imanishi, M. \& Nakanishi, K., 2006,
2148: \pasj, 58, 813
2149: \bibitem[Imanishi et al.(2007)]{iman07} Imanishi, M., Nakanishi, K.,
2150: Tamura, Y., Oi, N., \& Kohno, K., 2007, \aj, 134, 2366
2151: \bibitem[Iono et al.(2004)]{iono04} Iono, D. et al. 2004, \apj, 616, L63
2152: \bibitem[Iono et al.(2005)]{i05} Iono, D., Yun, M. S., \& Ho, P. T. P. 2005,
2153: \apjs, 158, 1
2154: \bibitem[Iono et al.(2007)]{i07} Iono, D., Wilson, C.,
2155: Takakuwa, S., Yun, M. S., Petitpas, G. R.,
2156: Peck, A. B., Ho, P. T. P., Matsushita, S., Pihlstrom, Y. M., \&
2157: Wang Z., 2007, \apj, 659, 283
2158: \bibitem[Iono et al.(2008)]{i08} Iono, D. et al., 2008, submitted to \apj
2159: \bibitem[Johnstone et al.(2000)]{j00}Johnstone, D., Wilson, C. D., Moriarty-Schieven, G., Joncas, G., Smith, G., \& Fich, M. 2000, \apj, 545, 327
2160: \bibitem[Juvela(1997)]{juve97} Juvela, M. 1997, \aap, 322, 943
2161: \bibitem[Juvela \& Padoan(2003)]{j03} Juvela, M. \& Padoan P., 2003, \aap, 397, 201
2162: \bibitem[Kennicutt(1998)]{k98}Kennicutt, R. C., 1998, \araa, 36, 189
2163: \bibitem[Klaas et al.(2001)]{k01}Klaas, U. et al. 2001, \aap, 379, 823
2164: \bibitem[Komossa et al.(2003)]{k03}
2165: Komossa, S., Burwitz, V., Hasinger, G., Predehl, P., \& Kaastra, J. S.;
2166: Ikebe, Y., 2003, \apj, 582, L15
2167: \bibitem[Le~F\`evre et al.(2000)]{lefe00} Le~F\`evre, O., Abraham, R., Lilly, S. J., et al. 2000, \mnras, 311, 565
2168: \bibitem[Le Floc'h et al.(2002)]{l02}Le Floc'h, E., Charmandaris, V., Laurent, O., Mirabel, I. F., Gallais, P., Sauvage, M., Vigroux, L., \& Cesarsky, C. 2002, \aap, 391, 417
2169: \bibitem[Lonsdale et al.(1993)]{l93} Lonsdale, C. J., Smith, H. J.,
2170: \& Lonsdale, C. J. 1993, \apj, 405, L9
2171: \bibitem[Lonsdale et al.(2003)]{l03} Lonsdale, C. J., Lonsdale, C. J.,
2172: Smith, H. E., \& Diamond, P. J. 2003, \apj, 592, 804
2173: \bibitem[Maiolino et al.(2003)]{m03} Maiolino, R., et al. 2003,
2174: \mnras, 344, L59
2175: \bibitem[Marshall et al.(2007)]{m07}Marshall, J. A., Herter, T. L.,
2176: Armus, L., Charmandaris, V., Spoon, H. W. W., Bernard-Salas, J., \&
2177: Houck, J. R. 2007, \apj, 670, 129
2178: \bibitem[Meier \& Turner(2001)]{mt01} Meier, D. S., \& Turner, J. L.,
2179: 2001, \apj, 551, 687
2180: \bibitem[Mihos \& Hernquist(1996)]{miho96} Mihos, J. C. \& Hernquist, L. 1996, \apj, 464, 641
2181: \bibitem[Mundell et al.(2001)]{m01}Mundell, C. G., Ferruit, P. \& Pedlar,
2182: A., 2001, \apj, 560, 168
2183: \bibitem[Murphy et al.(1996)]{murp96} Murphy, T. W., Jr., Armus, L., Matthews, K., et al.
2184: 1996, \aj, 111, 1025
2185: \bibitem[Murphy et al.(2001)]{murp01} Murphy, T. W., Jr., Soifer, B. T., Matthews, K., \&
2186: Armus, L. 2001, \apj, 559, 201
2187: \bibitem[Neff et al.(1990)]{n90} Neff, S. G., Hutchings, J. B.,
2188: Stanford, S. A., \& Unger, S. W. 1990, \aj, 99, 1088
2189: \bibitem[Neff et al.(2004)]{n04}Neff, S. G., Ulvestad, J. S., \& Teng,
2190: S. H., 2004, \apj, 611, 186
2191: \bibitem[Neri et al.(2003)]{neri03} Neri, R. et al.~2003, \apj, 597, L113
2192: %\bibitem[Petitpas \& Wilson(2000)]{peti00} Petitpas, G. R. \& Wilson, C. D. 2000, \apj, 538, L117
2193: \bibitem[Papadopoulos(2007)]{p07a} Papadopoulos, P. P., 2007, \apj,
2194: 656, 792
2195:
2196: \bibitem[Petitpas et al.(2008)]{p08}Petitpas, G. R., et al. 2008, in preparation.
2197: \bibitem[Ptak et al.(2003)]{p03}Ptak, A., Heckman, T., Levenson, N. A.,
2198: Weaver, K., \& Strickland, D. 2003, \apj, 592, 782
2199: \bibitem[Regan et al.(2004)]{r04} Regan, M. W. et al. 2004, \apjs, 154, 204
2200: \bibitem[Rigopoulou et al.(1996)]{r96}Rigopoulou, D., Lawrence, A., \& Rowan-Robinson, M. 1996, \mnras, 278, 1049
2201: \bibitem[Rosolowsky et al.(2003)]{r03}Rosolowsky, E. W., Plambeck, R., Engargiola, G., \& Blitz, L. 2003, \apj, 599, 258
2202: \bibitem[Rush et al.(1996)]{rush96}Rush, B., Malkan, M. A., Fink, H. H.,
2203: \& Voges, W., 1996, \apj, 471, 190
2204: \bibitem[Sakamoto et al.(1999)]{s99}Sakamoto, K., Scoville, N. Z.,
2205: Yun, M. S., Crosas, M., Genzel, R., \& Tacconi, L. J. 1999, \apj, 514, 68
2206: \bibitem[Sakamoto et al.(2006)]{s06}Sakamoto, K., Ho,. P. T. P., Iono, D.
2207: et al., 2006, \apj, 636, 685
2208: \bibitem[Sanders et al.(1988a)]{s88a} Sanders, D. B., Soifer, B. T.,
2209: Elias, J. H., Madore, B. F., Matthews, K., Neugebauer, G., \&
2210: Scoville, N. Z. 1988, \apj, 325, 74
2211: \bibitem[Sanders et al.(1988b)]{s88b} Sanders, D. B., Soifer, B. T.,
2212: Scoville, N. Z., \& Sargent, A. I., 1988, \apj, 324, L55
2213: \bibitem[Sanders et al.(1991)]{sanders91} Sanders, D. B., Scoville,
2214: N.Z., \& Soifer, B. T., 1991, \apj, 370, 158
2215: \bibitem[Sanders \& Mirabel(1996)]{sanders96} Sanders, D. B. \&
2216: Mirabel, I. F., 1996, \araa, 34, 739
2217: \bibitem[Sanders et al.(2003)]{s03} Sanders, D. B., Mazzarella, J. M.,
2218: Kim, D.-C., Surace, J. A., \& Soifer, B. T. 2003, \aj, 126, 1607
2219: \bibitem[Sault et al.(1995)]{s95} Sault, R. J., Teuben, P. J., \&
2220: Write, M. C. H., 1995, ASPC, 77, 433
2221: \bibitem[Scoville \& Solomon(1974)]{ss74} Scoville, N. Z. \& Solomon,
2222: P. M. 1974, \apj, 187, L67
2223: \bibitem[Scoville et al.(1989)]{s89} Scoville, N. Z., Sanders, D. B.,
2224: Sargent, A. I., Soifer, B. T., \& Tinney, C. G. 1989, \apj, 345, L25
2225: \bibitem[Scoville et al.(1991)]{s91}Scoville, N. Z., Sargent, A. I.,
2226: Sanders, D. B., \& Soifer, B. T., 1991, \apj, 366, L5
2227: \bibitem[Scoville et al.(2000)]{sco00} Scoville, N. Z. et al. 2000,
2228: \aj, 119, 991
2229: \bibitem[Seaquist et al.(2004)]{s04}Seaquist, E. R., Yao, L., Dunne,
2230: L., \& Cameron, H, 2004, \mnras, 349, 1428
2231: \bibitem[Smith et al.(2007)]{s07} Smith, B. J., Struck, C., Hancock,
2232: M., Appleton, P. N., Charmandaris, V. \& Reach, W. T., 2007, \aj,
2233: 133, 791
2234: \bibitem[Smith et al.(1998)]{s98} Smith, H. E., Lonsdale, C. J., \&
2235: Lonsdale, C. J. 1998, \apj, 492, 137
2236: \bibitem[Soifer et al.(1989)]{soifer89} Soifer, B. T., Boehmer, L.,
2237: Neugebauer, G., \& Sanders, D. B., 1989, \aj, 98, 766
2238: \bibitem[Solomon et al.(1997)]{s97} Solomon, P. M., Downes, D., Radford,
2239: S. J. E., \& Barrett, J. W. 1997, \apj, 478, 144
2240: \bibitem[Soifer et al.(2000)]{s00}Soifer, B. T., et al., 2000, \aj,
2241: 119, 509
2242: \bibitem[Soifer et al.(2001)]{s01}Soifer, B. T., et al., 2001, \aj,
2243: 122, 1213
2244: \bibitem[Strong et al.(1988)]{strong88}Strong, A. W. et al. 1988, \aap, 207, 1
2245: \bibitem[Strong \& Mattox(1996)]{sm96}Strong, A. W. \& Mattox, J. R. 1996, \aap, 308, L21
2246: \bibitem[Tacconi et al.(1999)]{t99} Tacconi, L., Genzel, R., Tecza,
2247: M., Gallimore, J. F., Downes, D., \& Scoville, N. Z. 1999, \apj,
2248: 524, 732
2249: \bibitem[Tacconi et al.(2006)]{t06} Tacconi, L. et al., 2006, \apj, 640, 228
2250: \bibitem[Tran et al.(2001)]{t01} Tran, Q. D., et al. 2001, \apj, 552, 527
2251: \bibitem[Veilleux et al.(1995)]{v95} Veilleux, S., Kim, D.-C., Sanders,
2252: D. B., Mazzarella, J. M., \& Soifer, B. T. 1995, \apjs, 98, 171
2253: \bibitem[Veilleux et al.(2002)]{v02} Veilleux, S., Kim, D.-C., \& Sanders, D. B. 2002, \apjs, 143, 315
2254: \bibitem[Wang et al.(2004)]{wang04} Wang, J. et al.~2004, \apj, 616, L67
2255: \bibitem[Wilson \& Scoville(1990)]{ws90}Wilson, C. D. \& Scoville,
2256: N. Z. 1990, \apj, 363, 435
2257: \bibitem[Wilson et al.(1997)]{w97}Wilson, C. D., Walker,
2258: C. E., \& Thornley, M. D. 1997, \apj, 483, 210
2259: %\bibitem[Wilson et al.(2003)]{w03}Wilson, C. D., Scoville, N. Z.,
2260: %Madden, S. C., \& Charmandaris, V. 2003, \apj, 599, 1049
2261: \bibitem[Xia et al.(2002)]{x02}Xia, Y. Y., Xue, S. J., Mao, S., Boller, Th., Deng, Z. G., \& Wu, H. 2002, \apj, 564, 196
2262: \bibitem[Yang \& Phillips(2007)]{yp07}Yang, M. \& Phillips, T., 2007,
2263: \apj, 662, 284.
2264: \bibitem[Yao et al.(2003)]{y03}Yao, L., Seaquist, E. R., Kuno, N.,
2265: \& Dunne, L. 2003, \apj, 588, 771
2266: \bibitem[Young et al.(1986)]{y86}Young, J. S., Schloerb, F. P.,
2267: Kenney, J. D., \& Lord, S. D. 1986, \apj, 304, 443
2268: \bibitem[Young et al.(1989)]{y89}Young, J. S., Xie, S.,
2269: Kenney, J. D., \& Rice, W. L. 1989, \apjs, 70, 699
2270: \bibitem[Yun \& Carilli(2002)]{yun02} Yun, M. S. \& Carilli, C. R. 2002, \apj, 568, 88
2271: \bibitem[Yun et al.(1994)]{y94} Yun, M. S., Scoville, N. Z., \& Knop, R. A.
2272: 1994, \apj, 430, L109
2273: \bibitem[Zezas et al.(2003)]{z03}Zezas, A., Ward, M. J., \& Murray,
2274: S. S., 2003, \apj, 594, L31
2275: \end{thebibliography}
2276:
2277: \clearpage
2278:
2279: %%% TABLE 1
2280:
2281: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccl}
2282: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
2283: \tablecaption{\bf The Nearby Luminous Infrared Galaxy Sample \label{tbl-sample}}
2284: \tablewidth{0pt}
2285: \tablehead{
2286: \colhead{Galaxy} & \colhead{$\log L_{\rm FIR}$} & \colhead{D$_L$} & \colhead{$cz$} \\
2287: %& \colhead{CO J=1-0 Reference} \\
2288: & \colhead{($L_\odot$)} & \colhead{(Mpc)} &
2289: }
2290: \startdata
2291: IRAS 17208-0014 & 12.41 & 189 & 12835 \\ % & \citet{ds98} \\
2292: Mrk 231 & 12.31 & 179 & 12642 \\ % & \citet{ds98} \\
2293: Mrk 273 & 12.08 & 166 & 11327 \\ % & \citet{ds98} \\
2294: IRAS 10565+2448 & 11.93 & 191 & 12921 \\ % & \citet{ds98} \\
2295: UGC 5101 & 11.87 & 174 & 11809 \\ % & \citet{g98} \\
2296: Arp 299 & 11.74 & ~~44 & 3088 \\ % & \citet{a97} \\
2297: %Arp 55 & 11.60 & 173 & 11715 + ~ 200 \\ % & \citet{s88b} \\
2298: Arp 55 & 11.60 & 173 & 11900 \\ % & \citet{s88b} \\
2299: Arp 193 & 11.59 & 102 & 7000 \\ % & \citet{ds98} \\
2300: NGC 6240 & 11.54 & 107 & 7339 \\ % numbers from Iono et al.
2301: VV 114 & 11.50 & ~~87 & 6010 \\ % & \citet{y94} \\
2302: NGC 5331 & 11.49 & 145 & 9907 \\ % & \citet{i05} \\
2303: NGC 2623 & 11.48 & ~~80 & 5535\\ % & \citet{bs99} \\
2304: NGC 5257/8 & 11.43 & ~~99 & 6775 \\ % & \citet{i05} \\
2305: NGC 1614 & 11.43 & ~~69 & 4778 \\ % & \citet{s89} \\
2306: \enddata
2307: \end{deluxetable}
2308:
2309: % redshifts calculated from frequency in scripts
2310: % 1+z = 345.796/nu(obs) and c = 2.998e5
2311:
2312: %%% TABLE 2
2313:
2314: \begin{deluxetable}{lcclccclcc}
2315: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
2316: \tablecaption{\bf Observational Properties of the Survey \label{tbl-obs}}
2317: \tablewidth{0pt}
2318: \tablehead{
2319: & \multicolumn{4}{c}{CO J=3-2 Observations} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{CO J=2-1 Observations} \\
2320: \colhead{Galaxy } & \colhead{Date} & \colhead{Number of}
2321: & \colhead{Sensitivity\tablenotemark{a}} & \colhead{Time}
2322: & \colhead{Date} & \colhead{Number of}
2323: & \colhead{Sensitivity\tablenotemark{a}} & \colhead{Time} \\
2324: & \colhead{Observed} & \colhead{Antennas} & \colhead{(mJy (K))}
2325: & \colhead{(hr)} & \colhead{Observed} & \colhead{Antennas}
2326: & \colhead{(mJy (K))} & \colhead{(hr)}
2327: }
2328: \startdata
2329: IRAS 17208-0014 & 20050818,0516 & 6 & 86 (1.01) & 5.9 & ... & ... & ... & ... \\
2330: Mrk 231 & 20060205 & 8 & 33 (0.55) & 3.3 & ... & ... & ... & ... \\
2331: Mrk 273 & 20060204 & 7 & 45 (0.67) & 3.8 & ... & ... & ... & ... \\
2332: IRAS 10565+2448 & 20060202 & 7 & 25 (0.46) & 3.7 & 20060206 & 7 &
2333: 15 (0.36) & 4.8 \\
2334: UGC 5101 & 20060130 & 6 & 32 (0.56) & 5.6 & 20060207 & 7 & 18
2335: (0.39) & 5.0 \\
2336: Arp 299 & 20060410 & 7 & 37 (0.087) & 5.6 & 20070327 & 8 & 20
2337: (0.086) & 6.6 \\
2338: Arp 55 & 20060129 & 6 & 40 (0.74) & 4.3 & 20060211 & 7 & 18
2339: (0.44) & 6.3 \\
2340: Arp 193 & 20060416 & 8 & 38 (0.093) & 3.6 & ... & ... & ... & ... \\
2341: NGC 6240 & 20051009,1014 & 7 & 44 (0.24) & 9.9 & ... & ... & ... & ... \\ % time assumes 12124 visbilities / 21 baselines * 0.5 min per visibility
2342: VV 114 & 051113 & 7 & 31 (0.057) & 4.4 & 20051115,1125 & 7 &
2343: 15 (0.029) & 7.0 \\
2344: %NGC 5331 & 20060412,20070325 & 7,8 & 92? & 11.3 %5.0 old, 6.3 new
2345: NGC 5331 & 20070325 & 8 & 50 (0.23) & 6.3
2346: & 20060422 & 8 & 21 (0.047) & 5.0 \\
2347: NGC 2623 & 20070116 & 8 & 12 (0.028) & 6.7 &
2348: 20060212,0213,0313 & 6,8 & 20 (0.40) & 13.0 \\
2349: NGC 5257/8 & ... & ... & ... & ... & 20060318 & 8 & 51 (0.12) & 4.8 \\
2350: NGC 5257 & 20060411,20070502 & 7,6 & 127 (0.12) & 3.0 & ... & ... & ... & ... \\
2351: NGC 5258 & 20060411,20070502 & 7,6 & 165 (0.16) & 3.0 & ... & ... & ... & ... \\
2352: NGC 1614 & 20051114 & 7 & 41 (0.079) & 5.1 & 20051112 & 7 & 14
2353: (0.027) & 5.5 \\
2354: \enddata
2355: \tablenotetext{a}{Noise level measured from the dirty map using
2356: line-free channels with
2357: 20 km s$^{-1}$ resolution.}
2358: \end{deluxetable}
2359:
2360: \clearpage
2361:
2362: %%% TABLE 3
2363:
2364: % put some kind of upper limits for HCO+ non-detections? too hard
2365: % given that the spectra don't cover the full line
2366:
2367: %\begin{landscape}
2368: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccccccccccccc}
2369: \rotate
2370: \setlength{\tabcolsep}{.05cm}
2371: \tabletypesize{\tiny}
2372: \tablecaption{\bf Interferometric CO and continuum fluxes\label{tbl-fluxes}}
2373: \tablewidth{0pt}
2374: \tablehead{
2375: \colhead{Galaxy } & \colhead{CO J=3-2 flux} & \colhead{beam } &
2376: \colhead{880 $\mu$m\tablenotemark{a}} & \colhead{HCO$^+$ J=4-3
2377: flux\tablenotemark{b}} &
2378: \colhead{CO J=2-1 flux} & \colhead{$^{13}$CO J=2-1 flux\tablenotemark{a}} & \colhead{1.4mm\tablenotemark{a}} & \colhead{beam} &
2379: \colhead{CO J=1-0 flux} & \colhead{3mm} & \colhead{beam} & \colhead{Refs.\tablenotemark{c}} \\
2380: & \colhead{(Jy km s$^{-1}$)} & \colhead{($^{\prime\prime}$)} & \colhead{(mJy)} & \colhead{(Jy km s$^{-1}$)} &
2381: \colhead{(Jy km s$^{-1}$)} & \colhead{(Jy km s$^{-1}$)} & \colhead{(mJy)} & \colhead{($^{\prime\prime}$)} &
2382: \colhead{(Jy km s$^{-1}$)} & \colhead{(mJy)} & \colhead{($^{\prime\prime}$)}
2383: }
2384: \startdata
2385: IRAS 17208-0014 & 478 $\pm$ 33 & 1.0x0.9 & 48 $\pm$ 10 & ... & 355 $\pm$ 7 &
2386: ... & 37 $\pm 3$ & 1.0x0.7 & 132 & $<$5 & 5.1x1.6 & 1,10 \\
2387: Mrk 231 & 308$\pm$8 & 0.9x0.8 & 80$\pm$4 & 25$\pm$3 & 280 & ... & 36 & 0.7x0.5 & 97 & 63 & 1.3x1.1 & 1 \\
2388: Mrk 273 & 441$\pm$ 14 & 0.9x0.8 & 56$\pm$5 & ... & 231 & ... & 8 & 0.6 & 78 & 11 & 1.4x1.3 & 1 \\
2389: IRAS 10565+2448 & 204$\pm$7 & 0.9x0.7 & 15$\pm$3 & ... & 187 $\pm$ 6 & $<$ 2 & 6 $\pm$ 1 & 1.1x1.0 & 68 & $<2$ & 2.3x1.4 & 1 \\
2390: UGC 5101 & 209$\pm$10 & 1.0x0.7 & 37$\pm$9 & ... & 237 $\pm$ 10 & $<$ 4 & 12 $\pm$ 2 & 1.2x0.9 & 50 & ... & 2.1x1.6 & 2 \\
2391: Arp 299 & 2582$\pm$34 & 2.3x1.9 & 101$\pm$7 & $\ge$67 $\pm$ 5 & 1976 $\pm$ 16 & 38.8 $\pm$ 3.4 & 46 $\pm$ 6 & 3.1x1.8 & 397 & 31$\pm$3 & 2.5x2.2 & 3\\
2392: ... IC 694 & $\ge$ 1610$\pm$ 27 & `` & 81$\pm$5 & $\ge$50
2393: $\pm$ 4 & 1168 $\pm$ 13 & 17.5 $\pm$ 2.7 & 40 $\pm$ 6 & `` & 242 & 17$\pm$2 & `` & 3 \\
2394: ... NGC3690 & $\ge$ 596$\pm$ 17 & `` & 20$\pm$5 & $\ge$17
2395: $\pm$ 3 & 355 $\pm$ 8 & 3.5 $\pm$ 1.1 & $<$4 & `` & 53 & 5$\pm$2 & `` & 3 \\
2396: Arp 55 & 146$\pm$12 & 0.9x0.8 & 26$\pm$7 & ... & 163 $\pm$ 9 & $<$ 6 & $<2$ & 1.1x0.9 & 83 & ... & 9x7 & 4\\
2397: ... Arp 55(NE) & 94$\pm$9 & 0.9x0.8 & 26$\pm$7 & ... &110 $\pm$ 8 & $<$ 3 & $<2$ & `` & ... & ... & `` & 4\\
2398: ... Arp 55(SW) & 52$\pm$8 & 0.9x0.8 & $<8$ & ... & 53 $\pm$ 4 & $<$ 3 & $<2$ & `` & ... & ... & `` & 4\\
2399: Arp 193 & 886 $\pm$ 15 & 2.2x2.0 & 39 $\pm$ 4 & $\ge$21 $\pm$ 5 & 450 & ... & 10 & 0.6x0.4 & 161 & $<$5 & 1.3x0.9 & 1 \\
2400: NGC 6240 & 2428 $\pm$ 52 & 1.6x1.3 & 33 $\pm$ 13 & $\ge$166 $\pm$ 12 & 1220 & ... & 5.9 $\pm $ 0.3 & 0.9x0.5 & 324 &
2401: ... & 4.9x4.1 & 7,9 \\
2402: ...NGC 6240(central) & 2318 $\pm$ 48 & 1.6x1.3 & 33 $\pm$ 13 &
2403: $\ge$166 $\pm$ 12 & 1220 & ... & 5.9 $\pm $ 0.3 & 0.9x0.5 & 324 &
2404: ... & 4.9x4.1 & 7,9 \\
2405: ...NGC 6240(WC) & 110 $\pm$ 19 & 1.6x1.3 & $<$16 & ... & ... & ... & ... & ... & ... &
2406: ... & ... & 7,9 \\
2407: VV 114 & 1530 $\pm$ 16 & 2.8x2.0 & 26 $\pm$ 6 & $\ge$17 $\pm$ 2 & 1109 $\pm$ 8 & 10.6 $\pm$ 2.6$\tablenotemark{d}$ & 11 $\pm$ 2 & 4.1x3.0 & 674 & $<$16 & 4.4x3.1 & 5\\
2408: NGC 5331 & 478 $\pm$ 26 & 2.3x1.0 & 27 $\pm$ 6 & ... & 333 $\pm$ 11 & 8.8 $\pm$ 2.4 & 8 $\pm$ 2 & 3.5x3.1 & 167 & ... & 5.4x4.4 & 6\\
2409: ... NGC 5331S & 401 $\pm$ 24 & `` & 27 $\pm$ 6 & ... & 250 $\pm$ 7 & 8.8 $\pm$ 2.4 & 8$\pm$ 2 & `` & 150 & ... & `` & 6 \\
2410: ... NGC 5331N & 77 $\pm$ 10 & `` & $<$ 12 & ... & 83 $\pm$ 9 & $<$ 4 & $<$ 4 & `` & 17 & ... & `` & 6 \\
2411: NGC 2623 & 607 $\pm$ 5 & 2.2x2.0 & 50 $\pm$ 2 & 27 $\pm$ 2 & 267 $\pm$ 8 & $<$ 3 & 17 $\pm$ 3 & 1.2x1.0 & 153 & ... & 3.5x2.4 & 7 \\
2412: NGC 5257/8 & 1140 $\pm$ 70 & 3.8x3.0 & 104 $\pm$ 21 & ... & 344 $\pm$ 51 &$<$ 20 & $<$ 16 & 3.5x2.8 & 387 & ... & 6.2x3.7 & 6 \\
2413: ... NGC 5257 & 286 $\pm$ 47 & `` & $<$ 26 & ... & 109 $\pm$ 24 & $<$ 10 & $<$ 8 & `` & 137 & ... & `` & 6 \\
2414: ... NGC 5258 & 854 $\pm$ 52 & `` & 104 $\pm$ 21$\tablenotemark{e}$ & ... & 235 $\pm$ 45 & $<$ 10 & $<$ 8 & `` & 250 & ... & `` & 6 \\
2415: NGC 1614 & 674 $\pm$ 14 & 2.6x2.1 & 27 $\pm$ 7 & $\ge$14 $\pm$ 3 & 670 $\pm$ 7 & 17.3 $\pm$ 2.7 & 21 $\pm$ 3& 3.7x3.3 & 215 & ... & 4x6 & 8 \\
2416: \enddata
2417: \tablenotetext{a}{Upper limits are 2$\sigma$ in a single beam (per
2418: galaxy component, if applicable).}
2419: \tablenotetext{b}{Lower limits indicated that the HCO$^+$ J=4-3 flux
2420: of the galaxy is uncertain
2421: because the full width of the line may not be contained within the
2422: spectrometer; see text.}
2423: \tablenotetext{c}{References are for CO J=1-0 and 3 mm
2424: properties; for Mrk 231, Mrk 273, Arp 193, and NGC 6240,
2425: reference is also for CO J=2-1 and 1.3 mm properties.
2426: 1. \citet{ds98}. 2. \citet{g98}. 3. \citet{a97}.
2427: 4. \citet{s88b}. 5. \citet{y94}. 6. \citet{i05}.
2428: 7.\citet{bs99}. 8. \citet{s89}. 9. \citet{t99} 10. L. Tacconi \&
2429: A. Baker, private communication.}
2430: \tablenotetext{d}{Only the eastern peak of VV 114 is detected in the
2431: $^{13}$CO J=2-1 line.}
2432: \tablenotetext{e}{NGC 5258 contains an off-nuclear continuum source whose
2433: flux is quoted here. The nucleus is undetected at $< 30$ mJy (2$\sigma$).}
2434: \end{deluxetable}
2435: \clearpage
2436: %\end{landscape}
2437:
2438: %%% TABLE 4
2439:
2440: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccccc}
2441: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
2442: \tablecaption{\bf CO 3-2 single dish and interferometric fluxes
2443: \label{tbl-co32}}
2444: \tablewidth{0pt}
2445: \tablehead{
2446:
2447: \colhead{Galaxy} & \colhead{CO3-2(SMA)} %& \colhead{CO3-2(single)}
2448: & \colhead{CO3-2(JCMT)\tablenotemark{a}} %& Jy/K
2449: & \colhead{Missing flux\tablenotemark{b}} & \colhead{Percent} \\
2450: & \colhead{(Jy km s$^{-1}$)} %& \colhead{(K(T$_A^*$) km s$^{-1}$)}
2451: & \colhead{(Jy km s$^{-1}$)} %& assumes
2452: & \colhead{(Jy km s$^{-1}$)} & \colhead{missing flux\tablenotemark{b}}
2453: }
2454: \startdata
2455: IRAS 17208-0014 & 478 $\pm$ 33 %& 35.3 $\pm$ 4.6
2456: & 985 $\pm$ 128 & 510 $\pm$ 260 & (51 $\pm$ 15)\% \\
2457: Mrk 231 & 308$\pm$8 %& 17.2$\pm$3.5
2458: & 480$\pm$100 & 170$\pm$150 & (35$\pm$23)\%\\
2459: Mrk 273 & 441$\pm$ 14 %& 14.8$\pm$3.1
2460: & 410$\pm$90 & 0 & 0 \\
2461: IRAS 10565+2448 & 204$\pm$7 %& 18.4$\pm$3.1
2462: & 470$\pm$60 & 270$\pm$120 & (57$\pm$14)\% \\
2463: UGC 5101 & 209$\pm$10 %& 17.6$\pm$2.8
2464: & 490$\pm$80
2465: & 280$\pm$130 & (57$\pm$14)\% \\
2466: Arp 299 & 2582 $\pm$ 57 %& (map)
2467: %& $\ge$ 2775\tablenotemark{c} old value from 3x3 map
2468: & 4890$\pm$180\tablenotemark{e} & 2300 $\pm$ 1600 & (47 $\pm$ 19)\% \\
2469: Arp 55 & 146 $\pm$9 %& 9.6 $\pm$ 0.8
2470: & $\ge$ 425 $\pm$ 40\tablenotemark{c} & $\ge$ 280 $\pm$ 100 & ($\ge$ 66 $\pm$ 10)\% \\
2471: Arp 193 & 890 $\pm$ 15 %& 40.1 $\pm$ 3.4
2472: %& 1775 $\pm$ 150 with eta(mb)
2473: & 1118 $\pm$ 94 & 230 $\pm$ 300 & (20 $\pm$ 24)\% \\
2474: NGC 6240 & 2428 $\pm$ 52 & 3205 $\pm$ 642 & 780 $\pm$ 1030 & (24 $\pm$ 26)\% \\
2475: VV 114 & 1530 $\pm$ 16 %& (map)
2476: %& 4691 $\pm$ 84\tablenotemark{e} , with eta(mb)
2477: & 2956 $\pm$ 133\tablenotemark{d} & 1430 $\pm$ 680 & (48 $\pm$ 15)\% \\
2478: NGC 5331S & 401 $\pm$ 24 & ... & ... & ... \\
2479: NGC 5331N & 77 $\pm$ 10 & ... & ... & ... \\
2480: NGC 2623 & 607 $\pm$ 5
2481: %& 984 $\pm$ 70\tablenotemark{e} , eta(mb)
2482: & 620 $\pm$ 44\tablenotemark{d} & 13 $\pm$ 190 & (2 $\pm$ 29)\% \\
2483: %NGC 5257 & 256 $\pm$ 45 & 437 $\pm$ 67 & 180 $\pm$ 130 & (41 $\pm$ 21)\% \\
2484: NGC 5257 & 286 $\pm$ 47 %& 7.1 $\pm$ 1.3
2485: %& 694 $\pm$ 106 with eta(mb)
2486: & 437 $\pm$ 67 & 151 $\pm$ 133 & (36 $\pm$ 24)\% \\
2487: NGC 5258 & 854 $\pm$ 52 %& 9.4 $\pm$ 1.4
2488: %& 527 $\pm$ 96 % single JCMT pointing value, eta(mb) I think
2489: %& 741 $\pm$ 15\tablenotemark{f} with eta(mb)
2490: & 504 $\pm$ 26\tablenotemark{e} & 0 & 0 \\
2491: %& 398 $\pm$ 146 & (76 $\pm$ 8)\% \\ values with single JCMT pointing value
2492: NGC 1614 & 674 $\pm$ 14 %& (map)
2493: %& 2335 $\pm$ 98\tablenotemark{e} eta(mb)
2494: & 1471 $\pm$ 62\tablenotemark{d} & 800 $\pm$ 330 & (54 $\pm$ 13)\% \\
2495: \enddata
2496:
2497: % values updated to take out eta(mb) for NGC 5258, VV 114, NGC 2623,
2498: % NGC 1614, Arp 193, N5257 on July 3, 2007
2499:
2500:
2501: \tablenotetext{a}{For galaxies that were not mapped, conversions from
2502: K(T$_A^*$) to Jy were done assuming
2503: the source is %either
2504: point-like
2505: compared to the single dish beam,
2506: %(IRAS 17208-0014, Mrk 231, Mrk 273,
2507: %IRAS 10565+2448, UGC 5101) or that the source fills the main beam
2508: %(NGC 5257, Arp 193, Arp 55) using $\eta_{MB}=0.63$.
2509: except for Arp 55 for which a main beam efficiency $\eta_{MB}=0.63$ was
2510: used.
2511: The flux for NGC 6240 is
2512: taken from \citet{grev07}.}
2513: \tablenotetext{b}{Uncertainty in missing flux assumes 20\% calibration
2514: uncertainty on each flux except for NGC 5258 and Arp 299, for which a
2515: 30\% calibration uncertainty in the JCMT data is assumed.}
2516: \tablenotetext{c}{Flux is from a single spectrum centered near the south-western
2517: source.}
2518: \tablenotetext{d}{Flux is calculated from a
2519: 7x7 map with 5'' spacing.}
2520: \tablenotetext{e}{Flux is calculated from a map made with HARP-B
2521: with 6'' spacing.}
2522: \end{deluxetable}
2523:
2524:
2525: %%% TABLE 5
2526:
2527: % could fold in Frayer et al. (1999) flux for VV 114 273 mJy with 14%
2528: % opacity and Uranus flux uncertainties? or leave as is
2529: % *** I decide to leave as is 19/02/2008
2530:
2531:
2532: \begin{deluxetable}{lccccccc}
2533: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
2534: \tablecaption{\bf Interferometric and Single Dish 880 $\mu$m continuum fluxes
2535: \label{tbl-cont}}
2536: \tablewidth{0pt}
2537: \tablehead{
2538: \colhead{Galaxy} & \colhead{JCMT flux\tablenotemark{a}} %& \colhead{CO3-2}
2539: & \colhead{CO3-2\tablenotemark{b}} & \colhead{SMA flux}
2540: & \colhead{Missing Flux\tablenotemark{c}} & \colhead{Percent\tablenotemark{c}}\\
2541: & \colhead{(mJy)} %& \colhead{(Jy km s$^{-1}$)}
2542: & \colhead{(mJy)} & \colhead{(mJy)}
2543: & \colhead{(mJy)} & \colhead{missing flux}
2544: }
2545: \startdata
2546: IRAS 17208-0014 & 137$\pm$41 & 18.9 & 48$\pm$10 & 70$\pm$31 & (59$\pm$14)\% \\
2547: Mrk 231 & 69$\pm$13 & 9.2 & 80$\pm$4 & 0 & 0 \\
2548: Mrk 273 & 60$\pm$16 & 8.4 & 56$\pm$5 & 0 & 0 \\
2549: IRAS 10565+2448 & 54$\pm$12 & 9.0 & 15$\pm$3 & 30$\pm$15 & (67$\pm$13)\% \\
2550: UGC 5101 & 102$\pm$18 & 9.4 & 37$\pm$9 & 56$\pm$30 & (60$\pm$17)\% \\
2551: Arp 299 & 376$\pm$10 & 93.7 & 101$\pm$7 & 181$\pm$69 & (64$\pm$10)\% \\
2552: Arp 55 & 58$\pm$12 & $\ge$8.1 & 26$\pm$7 & $\le$23$\pm$18 & ($\le$47$\pm$22)\% \\
2553: Arp 193 & 100$\pm$13 & 21.4 & 39$\pm$4 & 40$\pm$24 & (50$\pm$16)\% \\
2554: NGC 6240 & 133$\pm$40 & 61.4 & 33$\pm$13 & 38$\pm$30 & (54$\pm$22)\% \\
2555: VV 114 & 181$\pm$8 & 56.7 & 26$\pm$6 & 99$\pm$33 & (79$\pm$07)\% \\
2556: NGC 5331 & 64$\pm$6 & 9.2 & 27$\pm$6 & 28$\pm$15 & (50$\pm$18)\% \\
2557: NGC 2623 & 81$\pm$12 & 11.9 & 50$\pm$2 & 19$\pm$21 & (27$\pm$23)\% \\
2558: NGC 5257 & 101$\pm$20 & 8.4 & $<$26 & $>$66$\pm$28 & ($>$72$\pm$17)\% \\
2559: NGC 5258 & 150$\pm$28 & 16.4 & 104$\pm$21 & 29$\pm$46 & (22$\pm$29)\% \\
2560: NGC 1614 & 194$\pm$29 & 28.2 & 27$\pm$7 & 139$\pm$45 & (84$\pm$6)\% \\
2561: \enddata
2562:
2563: % values updated to take out eta(mb) for NGC 5258, VV 114, NGC 2623,
2564: % NGC 1614, Arp 193, N5257 on July 3, 2007;
2565: % missing flux and percent missing flux and rescaling to 880 microns
2566: % updated August 8
2567:
2568:
2569: \tablenotetext{a}{See text for a description of the source of the
2570: uncertainty listed here for each galaxy.}
2571: \tablenotetext{b}{SMA CO J=3-2 fluxes used for Mrk 273, NGC 5258, and NGC 5331.
2572: %Arp 299 flux is likely underestimated because the JCMT map is too small.
2573: Arp 55 flux is likely underestimated since spectrum was centered near the
2574: south-western source and so misses most emission from the stronger
2575: north-eastern source.}
2576: \tablenotetext{c}{Uncertainty in missing flux assumes 20\% calibration
2577: uncertainty on each flux.}
2578: \end{deluxetable}
2579:
2580: %%% TABLE 6
2581:
2582: % numbers updated August 9, 2007
2583: % new values for NGC 5331S, NGC 5257, NGC 5258
2584: % whole new entries for NGC 5331N, NGC 6240, NGC 2623
2585: % August 14, 2007: updated for Andrew's Tdust fits
2586: % August 22 (KITP): entered new values in, including corrections for
2587: % Mrk 231, IRAS 17208, N1614
2588:
2589:
2590: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccccccc}
2591: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
2592: \tablecaption{\bf Gas and dust masses from total luminosity\label{tbl-dustmass}}
2593: \tablewidth{0pt}
2594: \tablehead{
2595: \colhead{Galaxy} & \colhead{D$_L$} %& CO3-2
2596: & \colhead{$L'_{\rm CO}(3-2)$} & \colhead{$T_D$\tablenotemark{a}} %& 880 $\mu$m
2597: & \colhead{$M_{dust}$} & \colhead{$M_{\rm H_2}$\tablenotemark{b}} & \colhead{Gas/Dust} \\
2598: & \colhead{(Mpc)} %& (Jy km s$^{-1}$)
2599: & \colhead{($10^9$ K km s$^{-1}$ pc$^2$)} & \colhead{(K)} %& (mJy)
2600: & \colhead{($10^7$ $M_\odot$)} & \colhead{($10^9$ $M_\odot$)} &
2601: }
2602: \startdata
2603: IRAS 17208-0014 & 189 & 4.46 & 41.3
2604: & 4.32 $\pm$ 0.90\tablenotemark{c} & 7.13 $\pm$ 0.49 & 165 $\pm$ 36\tablenotemark{c} \\
2605: Mrk 231 & 179 & 2.58 & 43.1
2606: & 7.67 $\pm$ 0.38\tablenotemark{d} & 4.12 $\pm$ 0.11 & 54 $\pm$ 3\tablenotemark{d} \\
2607: Mrk 273 & 166 & 3.19 & 43.0
2608: & 6.17 $\pm$ 0.55\tablenotemark{e} & 5.10 $\pm$ 0.16 & 83 $\pm$ 8\tablenotemark{e} \\
2609: IRAS 10565+2448 & 191 & 1.94 & 38.6
2610: & 2.50 $\pm$ 0.50 & 3.11 $\pm$ 0.11 & 124 $\pm$ 25 \\
2611: UGC 5101 & 174 & 1.66 & 35.5
2612: & 5.67 $\pm$ 1.38\tablenotemark{e} & 2.65 $\pm$ 0.13 & 47 $\pm$ 11\tablenotemark{e} \\
2613: IC 694 (Arp 299) & 44 & 0.840 & 41.5
2614: & 0.655 $\pm$ 0.040\tablenotemark{e} & 1.34 $\pm$ 0.02 & 205 $\pm$ 13\tablenotemark{e} \\
2615: NGC 3690 (Arp 299) & 44 & 0.311 & 41.5
2616: & 0.162 $\pm$ 0.040 & 0.497 $\pm$ 0.014 & 308 $\pm$ 77 \\
2617: Arp 55(NE) & 173 & 0.737 & 34.5
2618: & 4.09 $\pm$ 1.10 & 1.18 $\pm$ 0.11 & 29 $\pm$ 8 \\
2619: Arp 55(SW) & 173 & 0.408 & 34.5
2620: & $<$ 1.26 $\pm$ 0.63 & 0.652 $\pm$ 0.100 & $>$ 52 $\pm$ 27 \\
2621: Arp 193=IC883 & 102 & 2.45 & 35.4
2622: & 2.06 $\pm$ 0.21 & 3.92 $\pm$ 0.07 & 190 $\pm$ 20 \\
2623: NGC 6240 & 107 & 7.39 & 40.4 & 1.63 $\pm$ 0.64 & 11.82 $\pm$ 0.25 & 725
2624: $\pm$ 286 \\
2625: VV 114 & 87 & 3.09 & 39.4
2626: & 0.876 $\pm$ 0.202 & 4.94 $\pm$ 0.05 & 565 $\pm$ 130 \\
2627: NGC 5331N & 145 & 0.427 & 32.1 & $<$ 1.45 $\pm$ 0.73 & 0.682 $\pm$ 0.089 &
2628: $>$ 47 $\pm$ 24 \\
2629: NGC 5331S & 145 & 2.22 & 32.1 & 3.27 $\pm$ 0.73 & 3.55 $\pm$ 0.21
2630: & 109 $\pm$ 25 \\
2631: NGC 2623 & 80 & 1.04 & 39.9 & 1.40 $\pm$ 0.06\tablenotemark{e} & 1.66 $\pm$ 0.01 & 118
2632: $\pm$ 4\tablenotemark{e} \\
2633: %NGC 5257 & 99 & 0.668 & 36.0
2634: %& $<$ 1.27 $\pm$ 0.63 & 1.07 $\pm$ 0.19 & $>$ 84 $\pm$ 45 \\
2635: NGC 5257 & 99 & 0.746 & 36.0
2636: & $<$ 1.27 $\pm$ 0.63 & 1.19 $\pm$ 0.20 & $>$ 94 $\pm$ 50 \\
2637: NGC 5258 & 99
2638: & 2.23 & 36.0 & 5.07 $\pm$ 1.02\tablenotemark{f} & 3.56 $\pm$ 0.22 & 70 $\pm$ 15\tablenotemark{f} \\
2639: NGC 1614 & 69 & 0.860 & 42.5
2640: & 0.313 $\pm$ 0.081\tablenotemark{c} & 1.38 $\pm$ 0.03 & 440 $\pm$ 114\tablenotemark{c} \\
2641: \enddata
2642: \tablenotetext{a}{ $T_{e}$ is the dust temperature calculated
2643: from fitting a modified blackbody function as in \citet{k01} to published data
2644: from 60 to 800 $\mu$m; see text.}
2645: \tablenotetext{b}{$M_{\rm H_2}$ calculated assuming CO3-2/CO1-0 = 0.5 and
2646: $M_{\rm H_2} = 0.8 L'_{\rm CO}(1-0)$ \citep{ds98}.}
2647: \tablenotetext{c}{Dust mass and gas-to-dust ratio have been corrected
2648: by a factor of 0.6 to account for a non-thermal contribution
2649: to the 880 $\mu$m flux. See text.}
2650: \tablenotetext{d}{Dust mass and gas-to-dust ratio have been corrected
2651: by a factor of 0.75 to account for a non-thermal contribution
2652: to the 880 $\mu$m flux. See text.}
2653: \tablenotetext{e}{There may be a non-thermal contribution to the
2654: continuum flux of this source; however, any effect on the dust
2655: mass and the gas-to-dust ratio is likely smaller than the
2656: uncertainties. See text.}
2657: \tablenotetext{f}{NGC 5258 contains an off-nuclear continuum source, whose
2658: flux is used here, while the CO J=3-2 emission comes primarily from
2659: the extended southern arm.
2660: Thus, the dust mass and gas-to-dust ratio given here are likely incorrect.}
2661: \end{deluxetable}
2662:
2663: %%% TABLE 7
2664:
2665: % August 22 (KITP): entered new values in, including corrections for
2666: % Mrk 231, IRAS 17208, N1614
2667:
2668: \begin{deluxetable}{lccccccccccc}
2669: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
2670: \tablecaption{\bf Gas and dust masses in a single beam \label{tbl-dustmasspeak}}
2671: \tablewidth{0pt}
2672: \tablehead{
2673: \colhead{Galaxy} & S$_{\rm CO}(3-2)$\tablenotemark{a}
2674: & \colhead{$L'_{\rm CO}(3-2)$(peak)\tablenotemark{a} } & \colhead{880 $\mu$m\tablenotemark{a}}
2675: & \colhead{$M_{dust}$\tablenotemark{b}} & \colhead{$M_{\rm H_2}$\tablenotemark{b}} & \colhead{Gas/Dust} \\
2676: & \colhead{(Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$)}
2677: & \colhead{($10^9$ K km s$^{-1}$ pc$^2$)} & \colhead{(mJy beam$^{-1}$)}
2678: & \colhead{($10^7$ $M_\odot$)} & \colhead{($10^9$ $M_\odot$)} &
2679: }
2680: \startdata
2681: IRAS 17208-0014 & 217 $\pm$ 11 & 2.02 & 48 $\pm$ 10 & 4.32 $\pm$ 0.90\tablenotemark{c} & 3.24 $\pm$ 0.16 & 75 $\pm$ 16\tablenotemark{c} \\
2682: Mrk 231 & 193 $\pm$ 3 & 1.62 & 80 $\pm$ 4 & 7.67 $\pm$ 0.38\tablenotemark{d} & 2.58 $\pm$ 0.04 & 34 $\pm$ 2\tablenotemark{d} \\
2683: Mrk 273 & 300 $\pm$ 6 & 2.17 & 56 $\pm$ 5 & 6.17 $\pm$ 0.55\tablenotemark{e} & 3.47 $\pm$ 0.07 & 56 $\pm$ 5\tablenotemark{e} \\
2684: IRAS 10565+2448 & 78.1 $\pm$ 2.2 & 0.743 & 15 $\pm$ 3 & 2.50 $\pm$ 0.50 & 1.19 $\pm$ 0.03 & 48 $\pm$ 10 \\
2685: UGC 5101 & 103 $\pm$ 4 & 0.817 & 30 $\pm$ 4 & 4.60 $\pm$ 0.61\tablenotemark{e} & 1.31 $\pm$ 0.05 & 28 $\pm$ 4\tablenotemark{e} \\
2686: IC 694 (Arp 299) & 877 $\pm$ 4 & 0.457 & 81 $\pm$ 5 & 0.655 $\pm$ 0.040\tablenotemark{e} & 0.732 $\pm$ 0.003 & 112 $\pm$ 7\tablenotemark{e} \\
2687: NGC 3690 (Arp 299) & 309 $\pm$ 4 & 0.161 & 20 $\pm$ 5 & 0.162 $\pm$ 0.040 & 0.258 $\pm$ 0.003 & 159 $\pm$ 40 \\
2688: Arp 55(NE) & 49.2 $\pm$ 3.6 & 0.386 & 21 $\pm$ 4 & 3.30 $\pm$ 0.63 & 0.617 $\pm$ 0.045 & 19 $\pm$ 4 \\
2689: Arp 55(SW) & 22.5 $\pm$ 2.5 & 0.176 & $<$ 8 $\pm$ 4 & $<$ 1.26 $\pm$ 0.63 & 0.282 $\pm$ 0.031 & $>$ 22 $\pm$ 11 \\
2690: Arp 193 & 477 $\pm$ 4 & 1.32 & 39 $\pm$ 4 & 2.06 $\pm$ 0.21 & 2.11 $\pm$ 0.02 & 102 $\pm$ 11 \\
2691: NGC 6240 & 1120 $\pm$ 7 & 3.41 & 26 $\pm$ 8 & 1.28 $\pm$ 0.40 &
2692: 5.45 $\pm$ 0.03 & 424 $\pm$ 131 \\
2693: VV 114(east) & 306 $\pm$ 3 & 0.618 & 13 $\pm$ 4 & 0.438 $\pm$ 0.135 & 0.989 $\pm$ 0.010 & 226 $\pm$ 70 \\
2694: VV 114(center) & 223 $\pm$ 3 & 0.450 & 13 $\pm$ 4 & 0.438 $\pm$ 0.135 & 0.721 $\pm$ 0.010 & 165 $\pm$ 51 \\
2695: VV 114(west) & 145 $\pm$ 3 & 0.293 & $<$ 8 $\pm$ 4 & $<$ 0.269 $\pm$ 0.134 & 0.469 $\pm$ 0.010 & $>$ 174 $\pm$ 87 \\
2696: NGC 5331N & 48 $\pm$ 5 & 0.266 & $<$ 12 $\pm$ 6 & $<$ 1.45 $\pm$
2697: 0.73 & 0.425 $\pm$ 0.044 & $>$ 29 $\pm$ 15 \\
2698: NGC 5331S & 127 $\pm$ 6 & 0.704 & 27 $\pm$ 6 & 3.27 $\pm$ 0.73 & 1.13 $\pm$
2699: 0.05 & 34 $\pm$ 8 \\
2700: NGC 2623 & 430 $\pm$ 1.3 & 0.735 & 50 $\pm$ 2 & 1.40 $\pm$ 0.06\tablenotemark{e} &
2701: 1.177 $\pm$ 0.004 & 84 $\pm$ 3\tablenotemark{e} \\
2702: NGC 5257 & 97 $\pm$ 11 & 0.253 & $<$ 26 $\pm$ 13 & $<$ 1.27 $\pm$
2703: 0.63 & 0.405 $\pm$ 0.046 & $>$ 32 $\pm$ 16 \\
2704: NGC 5258 & 60 $\pm$ 10 & 0.157 & $<$ 30 $\pm$ 15 & $<$ 1.46 $\pm$ 0.73 &
2705: 0.250 $\pm$ 0.042 & $>$ 17 $\pm$ 9 \\
2706: NGC 1614 & 275 $\pm$ 4 & 0.351 & 21 $\pm$ 4 & 0.243 $\pm$ 0.046\tablenotemark{c} & 0.561 $\pm$ 0.008 & 231 $\pm$ 44\tablenotemark{c} \\
2707: \enddata
2708: \tablenotetext{a}{Values measured at the peak emission except for
2709: NGC 5258, where it is measured at the peak in the nuclear region. See Table~\ref{tbl-obs}
2710: for the beam size for each galaxy.}
2711: \tablenotetext{b}{$M_{\rm H_2}$ and $M_{dust}$ are calculated with
2712: the same assumptions and dust temperature used in Table~\ref{tbl-dustmass}.}
2713: \tablenotetext{c}{Dust mass and gas-to-dust ratio have been corrected
2714: by a factor of 0.6 to account for a possible non-thermal contribution
2715: to the 880 $\mu$m flux. See text.}
2716: \tablenotetext{d}{Dust mass and gas-to-dust ratio have been corrected
2717: by a factor of 0.75 to account for a non-thermal contribution
2718: to the 880 $\mu$m flux. See text.}
2719: \tablenotetext{e}{There may be a non-thermal contribution to the
2720: continuum flux of this source; however, any effect on the dust
2721: mass and the gas-to-dust ratio is likely smaller than the
2722: uncertaintites. See text.}
2723: % Aug 10, 2007: decided to use 60% as correction for N1614 both
2724: % integrated and peak
2725: \end{deluxetable}
2726:
2727: % *** add a table with calculated quantities used in plots and correlations
2728: % such as Sigma(H2) peak? decided to leave out for now 19/02/2008
2729:
2730: \clearpage
2731:
2732:
2733: %%% TABLE 8
2734:
2735: %\begin{landscape}
2736: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccccccc}
2737: \tabletypesize{\tiny}
2738: \rotate
2739: \tablecaption{\bf Probability $p$ of a false correlation after
2740: removing the effect of distance \label{tbl-corr}}
2741: \tablewidth{0pt}
2742: \tablehead{
2743: \colhead{Quantity} & \colhead{$T_{\rm D}$} &
2744: \colhead{$\Sigma_{\rm H_2}$(peak)} &
2745: \colhead{beam area} &
2746: \colhead{$M_{\rm H_2}$(total)} &
2747: \colhead{$L_{\rm FIR}/M_{\rm H_2}$(total)} &
2748: \colhead{$L_{\rm FIR}/M_{\rm H_2}$(peak)} &
2749: \colhead{gas-to-dust ratio (peak)} &
2750: \colhead{CO J=3-2/2-1 line ratio}
2751: }
2752: \startdata
2753: $L_{\rm FIR}$ & {\bf 0.0168} & {\bf 0.0014} & 0.0552 & 0.2244 & {\bf
2754: 0.0250} & 0.2042 & 0.5774 & 0.4554 \\
2755: $T_{\rm D}$ & ... & {\bf 0.0016} & 0.0719 & 0.4902 & {\bf 0.0321} &
2756: 0.0997 & 0.2671 & 0.6234\\
2757: $\Sigma_{\rm H_2}$(peak) & ... & ... & {\bf 0.0063} & 0.2084 & 0.1219
2758: & 0.9933 & 0.7035 & 0.7662 \\
2759: beam area & ... & ... & ... & 0.1202 & {\bf 0.0284} & 0.5258 & 0.5393 &
2760: {\bf 0.0005}\\
2761: $M_{\rm H_2}$(total) & ... & ... & ... & ... & 0.2107 & 0.6571 &
2762: 0.1044 & {\bf 0.0074} \\
2763: $L_{\rm FIR}/M_{\rm H_2}$(tot) & ... & ... & ... & ... & ... & {\bf
2764: 0.0140} & 0.0916 & {\bf 0.0092} \\
2765: $L_{\rm FIR}/M_{\rm H_2}$(pk) & ... & ... & ... & ... & ... & ... &
2766: 0.2411 & 0.2213 \\
2767: gas-to-dust ratio (peak) & ... & ... & ... & ... &
2768: ... & ... & ... & 0.0578 \\
2769: \enddata
2770: %\tablenotetext{a}{Some column headings abbreviated temporarily to make
2771: %the table fit on one page.}
2772: \end{deluxetable}
2773: %\end{landscape}
2774:
2775: \clearpage
2776:
2777: \begin{figure}
2778: %\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.8]{ulirgs_lab.eps}
2779: \includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.8]{f1.eps}
2780: \caption[ulirgs_beam.eps]{Optical images from the Second Digital
2781: Sky Survey for the fourteen galaxies in our sample
2782: with the approximate half-power beam-width
2783: field of view of the SMA at 345 GHz overlaid.
2784: Each plot is labeled with
2785: $\log L_{\rm FIR}/{\rm L_\odot}$.
2786: In this figure and in the tables, the galaxies are
2787: presented in order of decreasing $L_{\rm FIR}$.
2788: \label{fig-dss_beam}}
2789: \end{figure}
2790:
2791: \begin{figure}
2792: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{I17208co32.mom0.eps}
2793: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{I17208co32.mom1.color_paper_edited.eps}
2794: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{I17208co32.mom2.eps}
2795: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{I17208cont850.eps}
2796: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f2a.eps}
2797: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f2b.eps}
2798: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f2c.eps}
2799: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f2d.eps}
2800: \caption[I17208co32.mom0.eps]{IRAS 17208-0014 CO J=3-2 and
2801: 880 $\mu$m continuum maps. See \S~\ref{sec-obs} for additional
2802: details of the data processing.
2803: (a) CO J=3-2 moment 0 map. Lowest
2804: contour is $2 \sigma = 11.4 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
2805: increase by factors of 1.5.
2806: Negative contours are shown as dashed lines. The synthesized beam is
2807: shown in the lower left corner of this and subsequent panels.
2808: (b) CO J=3-2 moment 1 map. Contours are 40 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
2809: (-5,-4,-3,-2,-1,0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7)$ relative to $cz$ with negative
2810: contours shown
2811: as dashed lines. Because of the high noise level, for only this galaxy
2812: the moment 1 and moment 2 maps were made
2813: using 40 km s$^{-1}$ channel
2814: maps with a 4$\sigma$ flux cutoff.
2815: Note that the negative side of the rotation curve
2816: peaks at -160 km s$^{-1}$ and then drops to -80 km s$^{-1}$
2817: at the extreme north-west end of the emission.
2818: (c) CO J=3-2 moment 2 map. Contours are 40 km s$^{-1}$ $\times (1,2,3,4,5)$.
2819: %This image was made using 40 km s$^{-1}$ channel
2820: %maps with a 4$\sigma$ flux cutoff.
2821: This figure plots velocity dispersion, $\sigma_v$, which for a
2822: gaussian line relates to the full-width half-maximum velocity via
2823: $V_{FWHM} = 2.355 \sigma_v$.
2824: (d) Uncleaned 880 $\mu$m map. Lowest contour
2825: is $2 \sigma = 8.2$ mJy and contours increase in steps of $1 \sigma$.
2826: Negative contours are not shown.
2827: \label{fig-I17208co32}}
2828: \end{figure}
2829:
2830: \begin{figure}
2831: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{Mrk231co32.mom0.eps}
2832: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{Mrk231co32.mom1.color_paper_edited.eps}
2833: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{Mrk231co32.mom2.eps}
2834: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{Mrk231cont850.eps}
2835: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{Mrk231hcop43.mom0.eps}
2836: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f3a.eps}
2837: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f3b.eps}
2838: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f3c.eps}
2839: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f3d.eps}
2840: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f3e.eps}
2841: \caption[Mrk231co32.mom0.eps]{Mrk 231 CO J=3-2 and
2842: 880 $\mu$m continuum maps. Notation as in Figure~\ref{fig-I17208co32}.
2843: (a) CO J=3-2 moment 0 map. Lowest
2844: contour is $2 \sigma = 5.2 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$
2845: and contours increase by factors of 1.5.
2846: %Negative contours are shown as dashed lines.
2847: (b) CO J=3-2 moment 1 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
2848: (-6,-5,-4,-3,-2,-1,0,1,2,3,4)$ relative to $cz$.
2849: %with negative contours shown as dashed lines.
2850: (c) CO J=3-2 moment 2 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times (1,2,3,4)$.
2851: %This figure plots velocity dispersion, $\sigma_v$, which for a
2852: %gaussian line relates to the full-width half-maximum velocity via
2853: %$V_{FWHM} = 2.355 \sigma_v$.
2854: (d) 880 $\mu$m map. Lowest contour
2855: is $2 \sigma = 8.2$ mJy and contours increase in steps of $2 \sigma$.
2856: Because of the strength of the central source, the cleaned continuum
2857: image is shown for this galaxy only.
2858: %Negative contours are not shown.
2859: (e) Uncleaned HCO$^+$ J=4-3 moment 0 map. Lowest
2860: contour is $\pm 2 \sigma = 7.92 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
2861: increase in steps of $1 \sigma$. This image has been
2862: corrected for continuum emission by subtracting the 880 $\mu$m
2863: continuum in the uv plane before imaging.
2864: \label{fig-Mrk231co32}}
2865: \end{figure}
2866:
2867: \begin{figure}
2868: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Mrk273co32.mom0.eps}
2869: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Mrk273co32.mom1.color_paper_edited.eps}
2870: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Mrk273co32.mom2.eps}
2871: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Mrk273cont850.eps}
2872: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f4a.eps}
2873: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f4b.eps}
2874: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f4c.eps}
2875: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f4d.eps}
2876: \caption[Mrk273co32.mom0.eps]{Mrk 273 CO J=3-2 and
2877: 880 $\mu$m continuum maps. Notation as in Figure~\ref{fig-I17208co32}.
2878: (a) CO J=3-2 moment 0 map. Lowest
2879: contour is $2 \sigma = 5.2 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$
2880: and contours
2881: increase by factors of 1.5.
2882: %Negative contours are shown as dashed lines.
2883: (b) CO J=3-2 moment 1 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
2884: (-11,-10,-9,-8,-7,-6,-5,-4,-3,-2,-1,0,1,2,3,4,5,6)$ relative to $cz$.
2885: %with negative contours shown as dashed lines.
2886: (c) CO J=3-2 moment 2 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8)$.
2887: %This figure plots velocity dispersion, $\sigma_v$, which for a
2888: %gaussian line relates to the full-width half-maximum velocity via
2889: %$V_{FWHM} = 2.355 \sigma_v$.
2890: (d) Uncleaned 880 $\mu$m map. Lowest contour
2891: is $2 \sigma = 10.0$ mJy and contours increase in steps of $1 \sigma$. Residual
2892: sidelobes can be seen at the edges of this figure.
2893: %Negative contours are not shown.
2894: \label{fig-Mrk273co32}}
2895: \end{figure}
2896:
2897: \begin{figure}
2898: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{I10565co32.mom0.eps}
2899: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{I10565co32.mom1.color_paper_edited.eps}
2900: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{I10565co32.mom2.eps}
2901: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{I10565cont850.eps}
2902: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f5a.eps}
2903: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f5b.eps}
2904: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f5c.eps}
2905: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f5d.eps}
2906: \caption[I10565co32.mom0.eps]{IRAS 10565 CO J=3-2 and
2907: 880 $\mu$m continuum maps. Notation as in Figure~\ref{fig-I17208co32}.
2908: (a) CO J=3-2 moment 0 map. Lowest
2909: contour is $2 \sigma = 4.3 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
2910: increase by factors of 1.5.
2911: %Negative contours are shown as dashed lines.
2912: (b) CO J=3-2 moment 1 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
2913: (-2,-1,0,1,2,3,4)$ relative to $cz$.
2914: %with negative contours shown
2915: %as dashed lines.
2916: (c) CO J=3-2 moment 2 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times (1,2,3)$.
2917: %This figure plots velocity dispersion, $\sigma_v$, which for a
2918: %gaussian line relates to the full-width half-maximum velocity via
2919: %$V_{FWHM} = 2.355 \sigma_v$.
2920: (d) Uncleaned 880 $\mu$m map. Lowest contour
2921: is $2 \sigma = 5.4$ mJy and contours increase in steps of $1 \sigma$.
2922: A residual
2923: sidelobe can be seen at the eastern edge of this figure.
2924: %Negative contours are not shown.
2925: \label{fig-I10565co32}}
2926: \end{figure}
2927:
2928: \begin{figure}
2929: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{I10565co21.mom0.eps}
2930: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{I10565co21.mom1.color_paper_edited.eps}
2931: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{I10565co21.mom2.eps}
2932: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{I10565cont1300.eps}
2933: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f6a.eps}
2934: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f6b.eps}
2935: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f6c.eps}
2936: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f6d.eps}
2937: \caption[I10565co21.mom0.eps]{IRAS 10565 CO J=2-1 and
2938: 1.3 mm continuum maps. Notation as in Figure~\ref{fig-I17208co32}.
2939: (a) CO J=2-1 moment 0 map. Lowest
2940: contour is $\pm 2 \sigma = 2.7 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
2941: increase by factors of 1.5. %Negative contours are shown as dashed lines.
2942: (b) CO J=2-1 moment 1 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
2943: (-2,-1,0,1,2,3,4)$ relative to $cz$.
2944: % with negative contours shown as dashed lines.
2945: (c) CO J=2-1 moment 2 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times (1,2,3)$.
2946: %This figures plots velocity dispersion, $\sigma_v$, which for a
2947: %gaussian line relates to the full-width half-maximum velocity via
2948: %$V_{FWHM} = 2.355 \sigma_v$.
2949: (d) Uncleaned 1.3 mm map. Lowest contour
2950: is $2 \sigma = 2.0$ mJy and contours increase in steps of $1 \sigma$.
2951: %Negative contours are not shown.
2952: \label{fig-I10565co21}}
2953: \end{figure}
2954:
2955: \begin{figure}
2956: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{UGC5101co32.mom0.eps}
2957: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{UGC5101co32.mom1.color_paper_edited.eps}
2958: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{UGC5101co32.mom2.eps}
2959: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{UGC5101cont850.eps}
2960: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f7a.eps}
2961: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f7b.eps}
2962: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f7c.eps}
2963: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f7d.eps}
2964: \caption[UGC5101co32.mom0.eps]{UGC 5101 CO J=3-2 and
2965: 880 $\mu$m continuum maps. Notation as in Figure~\ref{fig-I17208co32}.
2966: (a) CO J=3-2 moment 0 map. Lowest
2967: contour is $2 \sigma = 7.6 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$
2968: and contours
2969: increase by factors of 1.5.
2970: %Negative contours are shown as dashed lines.
2971: (b) CO J=3-2 moment 1 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
2972: (-15,-14,-13,...-2,-1,0,1,2,...,10,11)$ relative to $cz$.
2973: %with negative contours shown
2974: %as dashed lines.
2975: (c) CO J=3-2 moment 2 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8)$.
2976: %This figure plots velocity dispersion, $\sigma_v$, which for a
2977: %gaussian line relates to the full-width half-maximum velocity via
2978: %$V_{FWHM} = 2.355 \sigma_v$.
2979: (d) Uncleaned 880 $\mu$m map. Lowest contour
2980: is $2 \sigma = 5.4$ mJy and contours increase in steps of $1 \sigma$.
2981: Sidelobes can be seen at the edges of this figure.
2982: %Negative contours are not shown.
2983: \label{fig-UGC5101co32}}
2984: \end{figure}
2985:
2986: \begin{figure}
2987: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{UGC5101co21.mom0.eps}
2988: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{UGC5101co21.mom1.color_paper_edited.eps}
2989: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{UGC5101co21.mom2.eps}
2990: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{UGC5101cont1300.eps}
2991: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f8a.eps}
2992: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f8b.eps}
2993: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f8c.eps}
2994: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f8d.eps}
2995: \caption[UGC5101co21.mom0.eps]{UGC 5101 CO J=2-1 and
2996: 1.3 mm continuum maps. Notation as in Figure~\ref{fig-I17208co32}.
2997: (a) CO J=2-1 moment 0 map. Lowest
2998: contour is $\pm 2 \sigma = 4.6 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
2999: increase by factors of 1.5.
3000: %Negative contours are shown as dashed lines.
3001: (b) CO J=2-1 moment 1 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
3002: (-13,-12,-11,...-2,-1,0,1,2,...,8,9,10)$ relative to $cz$.
3003: %with negative contours shown
3004: %as dashed lines.
3005: (c) CO J=2-1 moment 2 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8)$.
3006: %This figures plots velocity dispersion, $\sigma_v$, which for a
3007: %gaussian line relates to the full-width half-maximum velocity via
3008: %$V_{FWHM} = 2.355 \sigma_v$.
3009: (d) Uncleaned 1.3 mm map. Lowest contour
3010: is $2 \sigma = 3.0$ mJy and contours increase in steps of $1 \sigma$.
3011: %Negative contours are not shown.
3012: \label{fig-UGC5101co21}}
3013: \end{figure}
3014:
3015: \begin{figure}
3016: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Arp299co32.mom0.eps}
3017: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Arp299co32.mom1.color_paper_edited.eps}
3018: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Arp299co32.mom2.eps}
3019: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Arp299cont850.eps}
3020: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Arp299hcop43.mom0.eps}
3021: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f9a.eps}
3022: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f9b.eps}
3023: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f9c.eps}
3024: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f9d.eps}
3025: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f9e.eps}
3026: \caption[Arp299co32.mom0.eps]{Arp 299 CO J=3-2 and
3027: 880 $\mu$m continuum maps. Notation as in Figures~\ref{fig-I17208co32}
3028: and \ref{fig-Mrk231co32}.
3029: (a) CO J=3-2 moment 0 map. Lowest
3030: contour is $\pm 2 \sigma = 8.7 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3031: increase by factors of 1.5.
3032: %Negative contours are shown as dashed lines.
3033: (b) CO J=3-2 moment 1 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
3034: (-8,-7,-6,-5,-4,-3,-2,-1,0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9)$
3035: relative to $cz$.
3036: %with negative contours shown
3037: %as dashed lines.
3038: (c) CO J=3-2 moment 2 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times (1,2,3,4,5,6)$.
3039: %This figure plots velocity dispersion, $\sigma_v$, which for a
3040: %gaussian line relates to the full-width half-maximum velocity via
3041: %$V_{FWHM} = 2.355 \sigma_v$.
3042: (d) Uncleaned 880 $\mu$m map. Lowest contour
3043: is $2 \sigma = 9.8$ mJy and contours increase in steps of $1 \sigma$
3044: to 4$\sigma$ and then increase in steps of $2 \sigma$.
3045: %Negative contours are not shown.
3046: (e) Uncleaned HCO$^+$ J=4-3 moment 0 map. Lowest
3047: contour is $\pm 2 \sigma = 7.42 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3048: increase by in steps of $1 \sigma$ to $4\sigma$ and then by steps of
3049: 2$\sigma$.
3050: \label{fig-Arp299co32}}
3051: \end{figure}
3052:
3053: \begin{figure}
3054: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Arp299co21.mom0.blackwhitepaper.eps}
3055: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Arp299co21_2007.mom1.color_paper_edited.eps}
3056: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Arp299co21_2007.mom2.bw_paper.eps}
3057: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Arp299cont1300.eps}
3058: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Arp299_13co21_2007.mom0.eps}
3059: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f10a.eps}
3060: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f10b.eps}
3061: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f10c.eps}
3062: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f10d.eps}
3063: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f10e.eps}
3064: \caption[Arp299co21.mom0.eps]{Arp 299 CO J=2-1 and
3065: 1.3 mm continuum maps. Notation as in Figure~\ref{fig-I17208co32}.
3066: (a) CO J=2-1 moment 0 map. Lowest
3067: contour is $\pm 2 \sigma = 4.6 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3068: increase by factors of 1.5.
3069: %Negative contours are shown as dashed lines.
3070: (b) CO J=2-1 moment 1 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
3071: (-9,-8,-7,-6,-5,-4,-3,-2,-1,0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9)$
3072: relative to $cz$.
3073: %with negative contours shown
3074: %as dashed lines.
3075: (c) CO J=2-1 moment 2 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times (1,2,3,4,5)$.
3076: %This figures plots velocity dispersion, $\sigma_v$, which for a
3077: %gaussian line relates to the full-width half-maximum velocity via
3078: %$V_{FWHM} = 2.355 \sigma_v$.
3079: (d) Uncleaned 1.3 mm map. Lowest contour
3080: is $2 \sigma = 5.4$ mJy and contours increase in steps of $2 \sigma$.
3081: %Negative contours are not shown.
3082: (e) $^{13}$CO J=2-1 moment 0 map. Lowest
3083: contour is $\pm 2 \sigma = 3.9 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3084: increase in steps of $1 \sigma$. This image has been
3085: corrected for continuum emission by subtracting the 1.3 mm
3086: continuum in the uv plane before imaging.
3087: \label{fig-Arp299co21}}
3088: \end{figure}
3089:
3090: \begin{figure}
3091: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Arp55co32.mom0.eps}
3092: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Arp55co32.mom1.color_paper_edited.eps}
3093: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Arp55co32.mom2.eps}
3094: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Arp55cont850.eps}
3095: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f11a.eps}
3096: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f11b.eps}
3097: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f11c.eps}
3098: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f11d.eps}
3099: \caption[Arp55co32.mom0.eps]{Arp 55 CO J=3-2 and
3100: 880 $\mu$m continuum maps. Notation as in Figure~\ref{fig-I17208co32}.
3101: (a) CO J=3-2 moment 0 map. Lowest
3102: contour is $2 \sigma = 6.0 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3103: increase by factors of 1.5.
3104: %Negative contours are shown as dashed lines.
3105: (b) CO J=3-2 moment 1 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
3106: (-1,0,1,2,3,4)$ relative to $cz$.
3107: %with negative contours shown
3108: %as dashed lines.
3109: (c) CO J=3-2 moment 2 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times (1,2)$.
3110: %This figures plots velocity dispersion, $\sigma_v$, which for a
3111: %gaussian line relates to the full-width half-maximum velocity via
3112: %$V_{FWHM} = 2.355 \sigma_v$.
3113: (d) Uncleaned 880 $\mu$m map. Lowest contour
3114: is $2 \sigma = 8.2$ mJy and contours increase in steps of $1 \sigma$.
3115: %Negative contours are not shown.
3116: \label{fig-Arp55co32}}
3117: \end{figure}
3118:
3119: \begin{figure}
3120: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Arp55co21.mom0.eps}
3121: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Arp55co21.mom1.color_paper_edited.eps}
3122: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Arp55co21.mom2.eps}
3123: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f12a.eps}
3124: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f12b.eps}
3125: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f12c.eps}
3126: \caption[Arp55co21.mom0.eps]{Arp 55 CO J=2-1
3127: %and 1.3 mm continuum
3128: maps. Notation as in Figure~\ref{fig-I17208co32}.
3129: (a) CO J=2-1 moment 0 map. Lowest
3130: contour is $2 \sigma = 3.4 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3131: increase by factors of 1.5.
3132: %Negative contours are shown as dashed lines.
3133: (b) CO J=2-1 moment 1 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
3134: (-7,-6,-5,-4,-3,-2,-1,0,1,2,3,4,5,6)$
3135: relative to $cz$.
3136: %with negative contours shown as dashed lines.
3137: Note that the positive end of the rotation curve in
3138: the north-east component peaks at 120 km/s and then drops to 100 km/s
3139: at the extreme southern end of the emission.
3140: (c) CO J=2-1 moment 2 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times (1,2,3)$.
3141: %This figures plots velocity dispersion, $\sigma_v$, which for a
3142: %gaussian line relates to the full-width half-maximum velocity via
3143: %$V_{FWHM} = 2.355 \sigma_v$.
3144: \label{fig-Arp55co21}}
3145: \end{figure}
3146:
3147: \begin{figure}
3148: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Arp193co32.mom0.eps}
3149: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Arp193co32.mom1.color_paper_edited.eps}
3150: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Arp193co32.mom2.eps}
3151: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Arp193cont850.eps}
3152: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{Arp193hcop43.mom0.eps}
3153: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f13a.eps}
3154: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f13b.eps}
3155: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f13c.eps}
3156: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f13d.eps}
3157: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f13e.eps}
3158: \caption[Arp193co32.mom0.eps]{Arp 193 CO J=3-2 and
3159: 880 $\mu$m continuum maps. Notation as in Figures~\ref{fig-I17208co32}
3160: and~\ref{fig-Mrk231co32}.
3161: (a) CO J=3-2 moment 0 map. Lowest
3162: contour is $2 \sigma = 8.5 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3163: increase by factors of 1.5.
3164: %Negative contours are shown as dashed lines.
3165: (b) CO J=3-2 moment 1 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
3166: (-9,-8,-7,-6,-5,-4,-3,-2,-1,0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9)$
3167: relative to $cz$.
3168: %with negative contours shown
3169: %as dashed lines.
3170: (c) CO J=3-2 moment 2 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times (1,2,3,4,5)$.
3171: %This figure plots velocity dispersion, $\sigma_v$, which for a
3172: %gaussian line relates to the full-width half-maximum velocity via
3173: %$V_{FWHM} = 2.355 \sigma_v$.
3174: (d) Uncleaned 880 $\mu$m map. Lowest contour
3175: is $2 \sigma = 8.0$ mJy and contours increase in steps of $1 \sigma$.
3176: Sidelobes can be seen at the edges of this figure.
3177: %Negative contours are not shown.
3178: (e) Uncleaned HCO$^+$ J=4-3 moment 0 map. Lowest
3179: contour is $2 \sigma = 8.84 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3180: increase by in steps of $1 \sigma$.
3181: \label{fig-Arp193co32}}
3182: \end{figure}
3183:
3184:
3185: \begin{figure}
3186: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{NGC6240co32.mom0.blackwhitepaper.eps}
3187: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{NGC6240co32.mom1.color_paper_edited.eps}
3188: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{NGC6240co32.mom2.bw_paper.eps}
3189: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{NGC6240cont850.eps}
3190: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{NGC6240hcop43.mom0.eps}
3191: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f14a.eps}
3192: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f14b.eps}
3193: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f14c.eps}
3194: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f14d.eps}
3195: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f14e.eps}
3196: \caption[NGC6240co32.mom0.eps]{NGC 6240 CO J=3-2 and
3197: 880 $\mu$m continuum maps. Notation as in Figures~\ref{fig-I17208co32}
3198: and \ref{fig-Mrk231co32}.
3199: (a) CO J=3-2 moment 0 map. Lowest
3200: contour is $2 \sigma = 12.8 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3201: increase by factors of 1.5.
3202: %Negative contours are shown as dashed lines.
3203: (b) CO J=3-2 moment 1 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
3204: (-2,-1,0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13)$
3205: relative to $cz$.
3206: %with negative contours shown
3207: %as dashed lines.
3208: (c) CO J=3-2 moment 2 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
3209: (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11)$.
3210: %This figure plots velocity dispersion, $\sigma_v$, which for a
3211: %gaussian line relates to the full-width half-maximum velocity via
3212: %$V_{FWHM} = 2.355 \sigma_v$.
3213: (d) Uncleaned 880 $\mu$m map. Lowest contour
3214: is $2 \sigma = 17$ mJy and contours increase in steps of $1 \sigma$.
3215: %Negative contours are not shown.
3216: (e) Uncleaned HCO$^+$ J=4-3 moment 0 map. Lowest
3217: contour is $\pm 2 \sigma = 10.22 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3218: increase in steps of $1 \sigma$.
3219: \label{fig-NGC6240co32}}
3220: \end{figure}
3221:
3222:
3223: \begin{figure}
3224: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{VV114co32.mom0.eps}
3225: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{VV114co32.mom1.color_paper_edited.eps}
3226: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{VV114co32.mom2.eps}
3227: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{VV114cont850.eps}
3228: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{VV114hcop43.mom0.eps}
3229: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f15a.eps}
3230: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f15b.eps}
3231: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f15c.eps}
3232: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f15d.eps}
3233: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f15e.eps}
3234: \caption[VV114co32.mom0.eps]{VV 114 CO J=3-2 and
3235: 880 $\mu$m continuum maps. Notation as in Figures~\ref{fig-I17208co32}
3236: and \ref{fig-Mrk231co32}.
3237: (a) CO J=3-2 moment 0 map. Lowest
3238: contour is $\pm 2 \sigma = 7.0 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3239: increase by factors of 1.5. The regions of positive emission at the
3240: extreme northern and southern edges of the image are artifacts.
3241: %sidelobes that have
3242: %not been completely removed by the cleaning process.
3243: %Negative contours are shown as dashed lines.
3244: (b) CO J=3-2 moment 1 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
3245: (-12,-11,-10,...,-2,-1,0,1,2,...,9,10,11)$
3246: relative to $cz$.
3247: %with negative contours shown
3248: %as dashed lines.
3249: (c) CO J=3-2 moment 2 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times (1,2,3,4,5)$.
3250: %This figures plots velocity dispersion, $\sigma_v$, which for a
3251: %gaussian line relates to the full-width half-maximum velocity via
3252: %$V_{FWHM} = 2.355 \sigma_v$.
3253: (d) Uncleaned 880 $\mu$m map. Lowest contour
3254: is $2 \sigma = 7.8$ mJy and contours increase in steps of $1 \sigma$.
3255: %Negative contours are not shown.
3256: (e) HCO$^+$ J=4-3 moment 0 map. Lowest
3257: contour is $\pm 2 \sigma = 3.68 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3258: increase in steps of $1 \sigma$. The eastern component contains
3259: 60\% of the flux given in Table~\ref{tbl-fluxes}.
3260: \label{fig-VV114co32}}
3261: \end{figure}
3262:
3263: \clearpage
3264:
3265: \begin{figure}
3266: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{VV114co21.mom0.eps}
3267: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{VV114co21.mom1.color_paper_edited.eps}
3268: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{VV114co21.mom2.eps}
3269: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{VV114cont1300.eps}
3270: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{VV114_13co21.mom0.eps}
3271: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f16a.eps}
3272: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f16b.eps}
3273: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f16c.eps}
3274: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f16d.eps}
3275: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f16e.eps}
3276: \caption[VV114co21.mom0.eps]{VV 114 CO J=2-1 and
3277: 1.3 mm continuum maps. Notation as in Figure~\ref{fig-I17208co32}
3278: and~\ref{fig-Arp299co21}.
3279: (a) CO J=2-1 moment 0 map. Lowest
3280: contour is $\pm 2 \sigma = 3.5 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3281: increase by factors of 1.5. (This image also has strong artifacts
3282: similar to those seen in Figure~\ref{fig-VV114co32} but they are
3283: outside the field of view shown here.)
3284: %Negative contours are shown as dashed lines.
3285: (b) CO J=2-1 moment 1 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
3286: (-12,-11,-10,...,-2,-1,0,1,2,...,9,10,11)$
3287: relative to $cz$.
3288: %with negative contours shown
3289: %as dashed lines.
3290: (c) CO J=2-1 moment 2 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times (1,2,3,4,5)$.
3291: %This figures plots velocity dispersion, $\sigma_v$, which for a
3292: %gaussian line relates to the full-width half-maximum velocity via
3293: %$V_{FWHM} = 2.355 \sigma_v$.
3294: (d) Uncleaned 1.3 mm map. Lowest contour
3295: is $2 \sigma = 2.6$ mJy and contours increase in steps of $1 \sigma$.
3296: %Negative contours are not shown.
3297: (e) $^{13}$CO J=2-1 moment 0 map. Lowest
3298: contour is $\pm 2 \sigma = 3.2 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3299: increase in steps of $1 \sigma$.
3300: %This image has been
3301: %corrected for continuum emission by subtracting the 1.3 mm
3302: %continuum in the uv plane before imaging.
3303: \label{fig-VV114co21}}
3304: \end{figure}
3305:
3306:
3307: \begin{figure}
3308: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.55]{NGC5331co32_2007r2.mom0.blackwhitepaper.eps}
3309: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.55]{NGC5331co32_2007r2.mom1.color_paper_edited.eps}
3310: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.55]{NGC5331co32_2007r2.mom2.bw_paper.eps}
3311: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.55]{NGC5331cont850.eps}
3312: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.5]{f17a.eps}
3313: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.5]{f17b.eps}
3314: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.5]{f17c.eps}
3315: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.5]{f17d.eps}
3316: \caption[NGC5331co32.mom0.eps]{NGC 5331 CO J=3-2 and
3317: 880 $\mu$m continuum maps. Notation as in Figure~\ref{fig-I17208co32}.
3318: (a) CO J=3-2 moment 0 map. Lowest
3319: contour is $\pm 2 \sigma = 21.6 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3320: increase by factors of 1.5.
3321: %The regions of positive emission at the
3322: %extreme northern and southern edges of the image are sidelobes that have
3323: %not been completely removed by the cleaning process.
3324: %Negative contours are shown as dashed lines.
3325: (b) CO J=3-2 moment 1 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
3326: (-8,-7,-6,-5,...,-2,-1,0,1,2,...,14,15,16)$ relative to $cz$.
3327: %with
3328: %negative contours shown
3329: %as dashed lines.
3330: (c) CO J=3-2 moment 2 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times (1,2,3,4,5)$.
3331: %This figures plots velocity dispersion, $\sigma_v$, which for a
3332: %gaussian line relates to the full-width half-maximum velocity via
3333: %$V_{FWHM} = 2.355 \sigma_v$.
3334: (d) Uncleaned 880 $\mu$m map. Lowest contour
3335: is $2 \sigma = 12$ mJy and contours increase in steps of $1 \sigma$.
3336: %Negative contours are not shown.
3337: \label{fig-NGC5331co32}}
3338: \end{figure}
3339:
3340: \begin{figure}
3341: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.4]{NGC5331co21.mom0.eps}
3342: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.4]{NGC5331co21.mom1.color_paper_edited.eps}
3343: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.4]{NGC5331co21.mom2.eps}
3344: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.4]{NGC5331cont1300.eps}
3345: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.4]{NGC5331_13co21.mom0.eps}
3346: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.4]{f18a.eps}
3347: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.4]{f18b.eps}
3348: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.4]{f18c.eps}
3349: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.4]{f18d.eps}
3350: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.4]{f18e.eps}
3351: \caption[NGC5331co21.mom0.eps]{NGC 5331 CO J=2-1 and
3352: 1.3 mm continuum maps. Notation as in Figure~\ref{fig-I17208co32}
3353: and~\ref{fig-Arp299co21}.
3354: (a) CO J=2-1 moment 0 map. Lowest
3355: contour is $\pm 2 \sigma = 5.1 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3356: increase by factors of 1.5.
3357: %Negative contours are shown as dashed lines.
3358: (b) CO J=2-1 moment 1 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
3359: (-12,-11,-10,...,-2,-1,0,1,2,...,12,13,14)$ relative to $cz$.
3360: %with negative contours shown
3361: %as dashed lines.
3362: (c) CO J=2-1 moment 2 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8)$.
3363: %This figures plots velocity dispersion, $\sigma_v$, which for a
3364: %gaussian line relates to the full-width half-maximum velocity via
3365: %$V_{FWHM} = 2.355 \sigma_v$.
3366: (d) Uncleaned 1.3 mm map. Lowest contour
3367: is $2 \sigma = 2.6$ mJy and contours increase in steps of $1 \sigma$.
3368: %Negative contours are not shown.
3369: (e) $^{13}$CO J=2-1 moment 0 map. The
3370: contour is $2 \sigma = 4.6 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$.
3371: %This image has been
3372: %corrected for continuum emission by subtracting the 1.3 mm
3373: %continuum in the uv plane before imaging.
3374: \label{fig-NGC5331co21}}
3375: \end{figure}
3376:
3377: \begin{figure}
3378: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{NGC2623co32.mom0.blackwhitepaper.eps}
3379: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{NGC2623co32.mom1.color_paper_edited.eps}
3380: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{NGC2623co32.mom2.bw_paper.eps}
3381: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{NGC2623cont850.eps}
3382: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{NGC2623hcop43.mom0.eps}
3383: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f19a.eps}
3384: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f19b.eps}
3385: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f19c.eps}
3386: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f19d.eps}
3387: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f19e.eps}
3388: \caption[NGC2623co32.mom0.eps]{NGC 2623 CO J=3-2 and
3389: 880 $\mu$m continuum maps. Notation as in Figures~\ref{fig-I17208co32}
3390: and ~\ref{fig-Mrk231co32}.
3391: (a) CO J=3-2 moment 0 map. Lowest
3392: contour is $\pm 2 \sigma = 2.7 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3393: increase by factors of 1.5.
3394: %Negative contours are shown as dashed lines.
3395: (b) CO J=3-2 moment 1 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
3396: (-8,-7,-6,-5,-4,-3,-2,-1,0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9)$ relative to $cz$.
3397: %with negative contours shown as dashed lines.
3398: (c) CO J=3-2 moment 2 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times (1,2,3,4,5)$.
3399: %This figures plots velocity dispersion, $\sigma_v$, which for a
3400: %gaussian line relates to the full-width half-maximum velocity via
3401: %$V_{FWHM} = 2.355 \sigma_v$.
3402: (d) Uncleaned 880 $\mu$m map. Lowest contour
3403: is $2 \sigma = 4$ mJy and contours increase in steps of $2 \sigma$.
3404: %Negative contours are not shown.
3405: (e) Uncleaned HCO$^+$ J=4-3 moment 0 map. Lowest
3406: contour is $\pm 2 \sigma = 2.60 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3407: increase in steps of $1 \sigma$ to $4\sigma$ and then by steps of
3408: 2$\sigma$.
3409: %This image has been
3410: %corrected for continuum emission by subtracting the 880 $\mu$m
3411: %continuum in the uv plane before imaging.
3412: \label{fig-NGC2623co32}}
3413: \end{figure}
3414:
3415: \begin{figure}
3416: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{NGC2623co21.mom0.blackwhitepaper.eps}
3417: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{NGC2623co21.mom1.color_paper_edited.eps}
3418: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{NGC2623co21.mom2.bw_paper.eps}
3419: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{NGC2623cont1300.eps}
3420: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f20a.eps}
3421: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f20b.eps}
3422: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f20c.eps}
3423: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f20d.eps}
3424: \caption[NGC2623co21.mom0.eps]{NGC 2623 CO J=2-1 and
3425: 1.3 mm continuum maps. Notation as in Figure~\ref{fig-I17208co32}.
3426: (a) CO J=2-1 moment 0 map. Lowest
3427: contour is $2 \sigma = 4.0 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3428: increase by factors of 1.5.
3429: %Negative contours are shown as dashed lines.
3430: (b) CO J=2-1 moment 1 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
3431: (-9,-8,-7,-6,-5,-4,-3,-2,-1,0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8)$ relative to $cz$.
3432: %with negative contours shown
3433: %as dashed lines.
3434: (c) CO J=2-1 moment 2 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times (1,2,3,4)$.
3435: %This figures plots velocity dispersion, $\sigma_v$, which for a
3436: %gaussian line relates to the full-width half-maximum velocity via
3437: %$V_{FWHM} = 2.355 \sigma_v$.
3438: (d) Uncleaned 1.3 mm map. Lowest contour
3439: is $2 \sigma = 2.6$ mJy and contours increase in steps of $1 \sigma$.
3440: %Negative contours are not shown.
3441: \label{fig-NGC2623co21}}
3442: \end{figure}
3443:
3444: \begin{figure}
3445: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{NGC5257co32_all.mom0.blackwhitepaper.eps}
3446: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{NGC5257co32.mom1.color_paper_edited.eps}
3447: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{NGC5258co32.mom0.blackwhitepaper.eps}
3448: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{NGC5258co32.mom1.color_paper_edited.eps}
3449: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{NGC5258co32.mom2.bw_paper.eps}
3450: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{NGC5258cont850.eps}
3451: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f21a.eps}
3452: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f21b.eps}
3453: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f21c.eps}
3454: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f21d.eps}
3455: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f21e.eps}
3456: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f21f.eps}
3457: \caption[NGC5258co32.mom0.eps]{NGC 5257/8 CO J=3-2 and
3458: 880 $\mu$m continuum maps. Notation as in Figure~\ref{fig-I17208co32}.
3459: (a) CO J=3-2 moment 0 map for NGC 5257. Lowest
3460: contour is $2 \sigma = 22.1 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3461: increase by factors of 1.5.
3462: %Negative contours are shown as dashed lines.
3463: (b) CO J=3-2 moment 1 map for
3464: NGC 5257. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
3465: (0,1,2,34,5)$ relative to $cz$.
3466: % with negative contours shown as dashed lines.
3467: (c) CO J=3-2 moment 0 map for NGC 5258. Lowest
3468: contour is $\pm 2 \sigma = 33.7 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3469: increase by factors of 1.5.
3470: %Negative contours are shown as dashed lines.
3471: (d) CO J=3-2 moment 1 map for
3472: NGC 5258. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
3473: (3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10)$ relative to $cz$.
3474: %with negative contours shown
3475: %as dashed lines.
3476: (e) CO J=3-2 moment 2 map for NGC 5258. Contour is 20 km s$^{-1}$.
3477: % $\times (1,2,3,4,5)$.
3478: %This figures plots velocity dispersion, $\sigma_v$, which for a
3479: %gaussian line relates to the full-width half-maximum velocity via
3480: %$V_{FWHM} = 2.355 \sigma_v$.
3481: (f) Uncleaned 880 $\mu$m map. Lowest contour
3482: is $2 \sigma = 30$ mJy and contours increase in steps of $1 \sigma$.
3483: %Negative contours are not shown.
3484: \label{fig-NGC5258co32}}
3485: \end{figure}
3486:
3487: \begin{figure}
3488: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{NGC5257co21.mom0.eps}
3489: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{NGC5257_8co21.mom1.color_paper_edited.eps}
3490: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{NGC5257co21.mom2.eps}
3491: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f22a.eps}
3492: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f22b.eps}
3493: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{f22c.eps}
3494: \caption[NGC5257co21.mom0.eps]{NGC 5257/8 CO J=2-1
3495: maps. Notation as in Figure~\ref{fig-I17208co32}.
3496: (a) CO J=2-1 moment 0 map. Lowest
3497: contour is $2 \sigma = 10.8 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3498: increase by factors of 1.5.
3499: %Negative contours are shown as dashed lines.
3500: (b) CO J=2-1 moment 1 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
3501: (-8,-7,-6,...,-2,-1,0,1,2,...,8,9,10)$
3502: relative to $cz$.
3503: %with negative contours shown
3504: %as dashed lines.
3505: %(c) 1.3 mm map. Lowest contour
3506: %is $2 \sigma = 2.6$ mJy and contours increase in steps of $1 \sigma$.
3507: (c) CO J=2-1 moment 2 map. Contour is 20 km s$^{-1}$.% $\times (1,2,3,4,5)$.
3508: %This figures plots velocity dispersion, $\sigma_v$, which for a
3509: %gaussian line relates to the full-width half-maximum velocity via
3510: %$V_{FWHM} = 2.355 \sigma_v$.
3511: \label{fig-NGC5257co21}}
3512: \end{figure}
3513:
3514: \begin{figure}
3515: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{NGC1614co32.mom0.eps}
3516: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{NGC1614co32.mom1.color_paper_edited.eps}
3517: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{NGC1614co32.mom2.eps}
3518: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{NGC1614cont850.eps}
3519: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.35]{NGC1614hcop43.mom0.eps}
3520: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f23a.eps}
3521: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f23b.eps}
3522: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f23c.eps}
3523: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f23d.eps}
3524: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f23e.eps}
3525: \caption[NGC1614co32.mom0.eps]{NGC 1614 CO J=3-2 and
3526: 880 $\mu$m continuum maps. Notation as in Figures~\ref{fig-I17208co32}
3527: and \ref{fig-Mrk231co32}.
3528: (a) CO J=3-2 moment 0 map. Lowest
3529: contour is $\pm 2 \sigma = 8.2 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3530: increase by factors of 1.5.
3531: %Negative contours are shown as dashed lines.
3532: (b) CO J=3-2 moment 1 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
3533: (-8,-7,-6,-5,-4,-3,-2,-1,0,1,2,3,4,5)$
3534: relative to $cz$.
3535: %with negative contours shown
3536: %as dashed lines.
3537: (c) CO J=3-2 moment 2 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times (1,2,3,4)$.
3538: %This figures plots velocity dispersion, $\sigma_v$, which for a
3539: %gaussian line relates to the full-width half-maximum velocity via
3540: %$V_{FWHM} = 2.355 \sigma_v$.
3541: (d) Uncleaned 880 $\mu$m map. Lowest contour
3542: is $2 \sigma = 8.2$ mJy and contours increase in steps of $1 \sigma$.
3543: %Negative contours are not shown.
3544: (e) Uncleaned HCO$^+$ J=4-3 moment 0 map. Lowest
3545: contour is $\pm 2 \sigma = 6.24 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3546: increase in steps of $1 \sigma$.
3547: %This image has been
3548: %corrected for continuum emission by subtracting the 880 $\mu$m
3549: %continuum in the uv plane before imaging.
3550: \label{fig-NGC1614co32}}
3551: \end{figure}
3552:
3553: \begin{figure}
3554: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{NGC1614co21.mom0.eps}
3555: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{NGC1614co21.mom1.color_paper_edited.eps}
3556: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{NGC1614co21.mom2.eps}
3557: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{NGC1614cont1300.eps}
3558: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{NGC1614_13co21.mom0.eps}
3559: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f24a.eps}
3560: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f24b.eps}
3561: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f24c.eps}
3562: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f24d.eps}
3563: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.3]{f24e.eps}
3564: \caption[NGC1614co21.mom0.eps]{NGC 1614 CO J=2-1 and
3565: 1.3 mm continuum maps. Notation as in Figure~\ref{fig-I17208co32}
3566: and~\ref{fig-Arp299co21}.
3567: (a) CO J=2-1 moment 0 map. Lowest
3568: contour is $\pm 2 \sigma = 3.0 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3569: increase by factors of 1.5.
3570: %Negative contours are shown as dashed lines.
3571: (b) CO J=2-1 moment 1 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times
3572: (-8,-7,-6,-5,-4,-3,-2,-1,0,1,2,3,4,5)$
3573: relative to $cz$.
3574: %with negative contours shown
3575: %as dashed lines.
3576: (c) CO J=2-1 moment 2 map. Contours are 20 km s$^{-1}$ $\times (1,2,3,4)$.
3577: %This figures plots velocity dispersion, $\sigma_v$, which for a
3578: %gaussian line relates to the full-width half-maximum velocity via
3579: %$V_{FWHM} = 2.355 \sigma_v$.
3580: (d) Uncleaned 1.3 mm map. Lowest contour
3581: is $2 \sigma = 2.6$ mJy and contours increase in steps of $1 \sigma$.
3582: %Negative contours are not shown.
3583: (e) $^{13}$CO J=2-1 moment 0 map. Lowest
3584: contour is $\pm 2 \sigma = 2.5 $ Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ and contours
3585: increase in steps of $1 \sigma$.
3586: %This image has been
3587: %corrected for continuum emission by subtracting the 1.3 mm
3588: %continuum in the uv plane before imaging.
3589: \label{fig-NGC1614co21}}
3590: \end{figure}
3591:
3592: \clearpage
3593:
3594: \begin{figure}
3595: %\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.7]{12co32spectra_1.eps}
3596: \includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.7]{f25.eps}
3597: \caption[12co32spectra_1.eps]{Peak and integrated spectra of the $^{12}$CO
3598: J=3-2 emission for four U/LIRGs from our sample. The integrated
3599: spectrum is the sum of the emission inside
3600: a rectangular region whose size was chosen to encompass all
3601: of the emission above $2\sigma$ in the moment 0 map. The velocity
3602: scale is relative to the recession velocity for each galaxy given in
3603: Table~\ref{tbl-sample}.
3604: \label{fig-co32_mrk_iras}}
3605: \end{figure}
3606:
3607: \begin{figure}
3608: %\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.7]{12co32spectra_2.eps}
3609: \includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.7]{f26.eps}
3610: \caption[12co32spectra_2.eps]{Peak and integrated spectra of the $^{12}$CO
3611: J=3-2 emission for three U/LIRGs from our sample.
3612: See Figure~\ref{fig-co32_mrk_iras} for additional details.
3613: \label{fig-co32_arp55_arp299_u5101}}
3614: \end{figure}
3615:
3616: \begin{figure}
3617: %\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.7]{12co32spectra_3.eps}
3618: \includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.7]{f27.eps}
3619: \caption[12co32spectra_3.eps]{Peak and integrated spectra of the $^{12}$CO
3620: J=3-2 emission for three U/LIRGs from our sample.
3621: Note the wider
3622: velocity scale used for NGC 6240.
3623: See Figure~\ref{fig-co32_mrk_iras} for additional details.
3624: \label{fig-co32_arp193_n6240_vv114}}
3625: \end{figure}
3626:
3627: \begin{figure}
3628: %\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.7]{12co32spectra_4.eps}
3629: \includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.7]{f28.eps}
3630: \caption[12co32spectra_4.eps]{Peak and integrated spectra of the $^{12}$CO
3631: J=3-2 emission for two U/LIRGs from our sample.
3632: See Figure~\ref{fig-co32_mrk_iras} for additional details.
3633: \label{fig-co32_n2623_n5257_n5331}}
3634: \end{figure}
3635:
3636: \begin{figure}
3637: %\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.7]{12co32spectra_5.eps}
3638: \includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.7]{f29.eps}
3639: \caption[12co32spectra_5.eps]{Peak and integrated spectra of the $^{12}$CO
3640: J=3-2 emission for two U/LIRGs from our sample.
3641: See Figure~\ref{fig-co32_mrk_iras} for additional details.
3642: \label{fig-co32_n1614_n5258}}
3643: \end{figure}
3644:
3645: \begin{figure}
3646: %\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.7]{12co21spectra_1.eps}
3647: \includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.7]{f30.eps}
3648: \caption[12co21spectra_1.eps]{Peak and integrated spectra of the $^{12}$CO
3649: J=2-1 emission for three U/LIRGs from our sample.
3650: See Figure~\ref{fig-co32_mrk_iras} for additional details.
3651: \label{fig-co21_i10565_u5101_arp299}}
3652: \end{figure}
3653:
3654: \begin{figure}
3655: %\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.7]{12co21spectra_2.eps}
3656: \includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.7]{f31.eps}
3657: \caption[12co21spectra_2.eps]{Peak and integrated spectra of the $^{12}$CO
3658: J=2-1 emission for two U/LIRGs from our sample.
3659: The integrated spectrum for VV 114 encompasses the entire
3660: extended emission region.
3661: See Figure~\ref{fig-co32_mrk_iras} for additional details.
3662: \label{fig-co21_arp55_vv114}}
3663: \end{figure}
3664:
3665: \begin{figure}
3666: %\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.7]{12co21spectra_3.eps}
3667: \includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.7]{f32.eps}
3668: \caption[12co21spectra_3.eps]{Peak and integrated spectra of the $^{12}$CO
3669: J=2-1 emission for two U/LIRGs from our sample.
3670: See Figure~\ref{fig-co32_mrk_iras} for additional details.
3671: \label{fig-co21_vv114_n5331_n2623}}
3672: \end{figure}
3673:
3674: \begin{figure}
3675: %\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.7]{12co21spectra_4.eps}
3676: \includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.7]{f33.eps}
3677: \caption[12co21spectra_4.eps]{Peak and integrated spectra of the $^{12}$CO
3678: J=2-1 emission for two U/LIRGs from our sample.
3679: See Figure~\ref{fig-co32_mrk_iras} for additional details.
3680: \label{fig-co21_n1614_n5257}}
3681: \end{figure}
3682:
3683:
3684: \begin{figure}
3685: %\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.7]{13co21spectra_1.eps}
3686: \includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.7]{f34.eps}
3687: \caption[13co21spectra_1.eps]{Peak and integrated spectra of the $^{13}$CO
3688: J=2-1 emission for 3 regions in the interacting galaxy
3689: Arp 299
3690: for which $^{13}$CO J=2-1 emission was detected.
3691: See Figure~\ref{fig-co32_mrk_iras} for additional details.
3692: \label{fig-13co21_arp299}}
3693: \end{figure}
3694:
3695: \begin{figure}
3696: %\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.7]{13co21spectra_2.eps}
3697: \includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.7]{f35.eps}
3698: \caption[13co21spectra_2.eps]{Peak and integrated spectra of the $^{13}$CO
3699: J=2-1 emission for 3 U/LIRGs from our sample
3700: for which $^{13}$CO J=2-1 emission was detected.
3701: See Figure~\ref{fig-co32_mrk_iras} for additional details.
3702: \label{fig-13co21_rest}}
3703: \end{figure}
3704:
3705:
3706: \begin{figure}
3707: %\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.7]{HCOspectra.eps}
3708: \includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.7]{f36.eps}
3709: \caption[HCOspectra.eps]{Peak spectra of the HCO$^+$
3710: J=4-3 emission for nine galaxy components from our sample
3711: for which HCO$^+$ J=4-3 emission was detected. The integrated spectrum
3712: is also given for NGC6240.
3713: See Figure~\ref{fig-co32_mrk_iras} for additional details.
3714: \label{fig-HCOp}}
3715: \end{figure}
3716:
3717: \clearpage
3718:
3719: \begin{figure}
3720: %\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=0.7]{multi_panel_good.eps}
3721: \includegraphics[angle=0,scale=0.7]{f37.eps}
3722: \caption[multi_panel_good.eps]{Pairs of quantities
3723: for the galaxies in our sample that showed significant correlations.
3724: (a) Peak H$_2$ surface density versus far-infrared luminosity.
3725: (b) Peak H$_2$ surface density versus dust temperature.
3726: (c) Dust temperature versus far-infrared luminosity.
3727: (d) Peak H$_2$ surface density versus beam area. Note that this
3728: correlation depends heavily on the two galaxies with the most
3729: divergent beam areas.
3730: (e) CO J=3-2/2-1 line ratio versus total H$_2$ mass detected with the
3731: SMA.
3732: (f) CO J=3-2/2-1 line ratio versus beam area.
3733: \label{fig-correlations}}
3734: \end{figure}
3735:
3736: \begin{figure}
3737: %\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=0.7]{multi_panel_bad.eps}
3738: \includegraphics[angle=0,scale=0.7]{f38.eps}
3739: \caption[multi_panel_bad.eps]{
3740: Correlations of five quantities with
3741: the ratio $L_{\rm
3742: FIR}/M_{\rm H_2}$,
3743: where $M_{\rm H_2}$ is the total mass detected with the SMA.
3744: All these correlations become insignificant if one of NGC 5257 or
3745: Arp 299 is removed from the analysis.
3746: (a) Beam area.
3747: (b) Far-infrared luminosity $L_{\rm FIR}$.
3748: (c) CO J=3-2/2-1 line ratio.
3749: (d) Dust temperature
3750: (e) Ratio of far-infrared luminosity to peak H$_2$ mass.
3751: \label{fig-bad_correlations}}
3752: \end{figure}
3753:
3754: \clearpage
3755:
3756: \begin{figure}
3757: %\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.65]{sigma_lm_peak_single.eps}
3758: \includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=.65]{f39.eps}
3759: \caption[sigma_lm.eps]{The ratio of global far-infrared luminosity to
3760: the peak H$_2$ gas mass detected with the SMA versus
3761: peak H$_2$ surface density. Only the highest surface density component
3762: is shown for composite systems.
3763: The error bars shown represent
3764: measurement errors on the CO J=3-2 emission as well as a 20\% calibration
3765: uncertainty. Note that the calibration uncertainty has the same systematic
3766: effect on both quantities, since both are derived from the same data set.
3767: No correlation is seen, in conflict with
3768: the earlier study by \citet{s91}. The approximate relationship
3769: seen by \citet{s91} (corrected by a factor of
3770: six to account for the different CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor) is
3771: shown as the straight line. The five galaxies in common between
3772: this study and that of \citet{s91} are labeled on the plot.
3773: %(b) The ratio of global far-infrared luminosity to
3774: %the peak H$_2$ gas mass versus
3775: %peak H$_2$ surface density. Two components are shown for Arp 55,
3776: %Arp 299, NGC 5331 and NGC 5257/8; in these cases, the global far-infrared
3777: %luminosity is used in each ratio. (Perhaps we should divide it by
3778: %two?) Note that I've included this plot only for completeness; for
3779: %the paper, I would suggest showing just (a).
3780: \label{fig-sigma_L/M}}
3781: \end{figure}
3782:
3783:
3784:
3785: % data from censtau_table2.txt; just Andrew's p values
3786:
3787: %quantity LIR T_D beamArea MH2 Sig(pk) L/M(pk) 32/21 G/D
3788: %T_D 0.0168
3789: %Beam 0.0552 0.0719
3790: %MH2 0.2243 0.4897 0.1201
3791: %Sigma 0.0144 0.0016 0.0063 0.2083
3792: %LIR/MH2(peak) 0.2042 0.0997 0.5258 0.9580 0.9933
3793: %CO32/21 0.4554 0.6234 0.0005 0.0074 0.7662 0.2213
3794: %gas/dust 0.5774 0.2671 0.5393 0.1044 0.7035 0.2411 0.0106
3795: %LIR/MH2(tot) 0.0250 0.0321 0.5259 0.2106 0.2213 0.0140 0.0092 0.0915
3796:
3797:
3798: \end{document}
3799:
3800: %%% TABLE 9
3801:
3802: % *** possible table with quantities used in correlations
3803: % hasn't been completely formated yet
3804: % decided to leave out for now 19/02/2008
3805:
3806: \begin{deluxetable}{lccccccccccc}
3807: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
3808: \tablecaption{\bf Derived quantities \label{tbl-derived}}
3809: \tablewidth{0pt}
3810: \tablehead{
3811: \colhead{Galaxy} & S$_{\rm CO}(3-2)$\tablenotemark{a}
3812: & \colhead{$L'_{\rm CO}(3-2)$(peak)\tablenotemark{a} } & \colhead{880 $\mu$m\tablenotemark{a}}
3813: & \colhead{$M_{dust}$\tablenotemark{b}} & \colhead{$M_{\rm H_2}$\tablenotemark{b}} & \colhead{Gas/Dust} \\
3814: & \colhead{(Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$)}
3815: & \colhead{($10^9$ K km s$^{-1}$ pc$^2$)} & \colhead{(mJy beam$^{-1}$)}
3816: & \colhead{($10^7$ $M_\odot$)} & \colhead{($10^9$ $M_\odot$)} &
3817: }
3818: \startdata
3819: IRAS 17208-0014 3.5776 0.0941785 2.89988 0.123165 2.55688 0.105196 41.3 0.598435 0.174631
3820: Mrk 231 3.62388 0.0808803 2.89773 0.113321 2.6947 0.0835143 43.1 0.488889 0.138861
3821: Mrk 273 3.81727 0.0818535 2.53983 0.114018 2.37247 0.0854858 43 0.848485 0.241495
3822: 10565+2448 3.28857 0.0842229 2.85467 0.11573 2.43765 0.0864722 38.6 0.484848 0.139014
3823: UGC 5101 3.36455 0.0883638 2.7539 0.118778 2.44656 0.0926786 35.5 0.391936 0.113641
3824: Arp 299(east) 3.51166 0.0795035 2.8756 0.112342 2.61174 0.0811248 41.5 0.612633 0.173717
3825: Arp 299(west) 3.05862 0.0804212 3.32864 0.112994 3.04332 0.0843421 41.5 0.746166 0.212784
3826: Arp 55(NE) 3.03157 0.107953 2.80965 0.133992 2.52845 0.124366 34.5 0.379798 0.116726
3827: Arp 55(SW) 2.69179 0.136549 3.14943 0.157942 2.78558 0.173115 34.5 0.436059 0.144206
3828: Arp 193=IC883 3.23863 0.0798143 2.26536 0.112563 1.99641 0.081158 35.4 0.875062 0.247948
3829: NGC 6240 3.93424 0.0796182 1.80357 0.112424 1.4675 0.0822112 40.4 0.884517 0.250895
3830: VV 114 2.9425 0.0799757 2.50492 0.112677 1.80591 0.0800585 39.4 0.613165 0.173604
3831: NGC 5331N 2.51898 0.130961 2.8612 0.153136 2.65591 0.152205 32.1 0.412316 0.135892
3832: NGC 5331S 2.94155 0.0923689 2.43863 0.121787 1.93926 0.0994086 32.1 0.712889 0.207065
3833: NGC 2623 3.19566 0.0794301 2.40935 0.11229 2.2596 0.0797988 39.9 1.0104 0.287504
3834: NGC 5257 2.13375 0.13842 2.82272 0.159562 2.40122 0.19287 36.0 1.04383 0.416723
3835: NGC 5258 1.92513 0.184602 3.03134 0.200943 1.878 0.100038 36.0 1.61513 0.560373
3836: NGC 1614 2.90886 0.0806943 2.68089 0.113188 2.29153 0.0820455 42.5 0.447098 0.126885
3837:
3838:
3839: IRAS 17208-0014 & 217 $\pm$ 11 & 2.02 & 48 $\pm$ 10 & 4.32 $\pm$ 0.90\tablenotemark{e} & 3.24 $\pm$ 0.16 & 75 $\pm$ 16\tablenotemark{e} \\
3840: Mrk 231 & 193 $\pm$ 3 & 1.62 & 80 $\pm$ 4 & 7.67 $\pm$ 0.38\tablenotemark{c} & 2.58 $\pm$ 0.04 & 34 $\pm$ 2\tablenotemark{c} \\
3841: Mrk 273 & 300 $\pm$ 6 & 2.17 & 56 $\pm$ 5 & 6.17 $\pm$ 0.55 & 3.47 $\pm$ 0.07 & 56 $\pm$ 5\tablenotemark{dd} \\
3842: IRAS 10565+2448 & 78.1 $\pm$ 2.2 & 0.743 & 15 $\pm$ 3 & 2.50 $\pm$ 0.50 & 1.19 $\pm$ 0.03 & 48 $\pm$ 10 \\
3843: UGC 5101 & 103 $\pm$ 4 & 0.817 & 30 $\pm$ 4 & 4.60 $\pm$ 0.61 & 1.31 $\pm$ 0.05 & 28 $\pm$ 4\tablenotemark{dd} \\
3844: Arp 299(east) & 877 $\pm$ 4 & 0.457 & 81 $\pm$ 5 & 0.655 $\pm$ 0.040 & 0.732 $\pm$ 0.003 & 112 $\pm$ 7\tablenotemark{dd} \\
3845: Arp 299(west) & 309 $\pm$ 4 & 0.161 & 20 $\pm$ 5 & 0.162 $\pm$ 0.040 & 0.258 $\pm$ 0.003 & 159 $\pm$ 40 \\
3846: Arp 55(NE) & 49.2 $\pm$ 3.6 & 0.386 & 21 $\pm$ 4 & 3.30 $\pm$ 0.63 & 0.617 $\pm$ 0.045 & 19 $\pm$ 4 \\
3847: Arp 55(SW) & 22.5 $\pm$ 2.5 & 0.176 & $<$ 8 $\pm$ 4 & $<$ 1.26 $\pm$ 0.63 & 0.282 $\pm$ 0.031 & $>$ 22 $\pm$ 11 \\
3848: Arp 193 & 477 $\pm$ 4 & 1.32 & 39 $\pm$ 4 & 2.06 $\pm$ 0.21 & 2.11 $\pm$ 0.02 & 102 $\pm$ 11 \\
3849: NGC 6240 & 1120 $\pm$ 7 & 3.41 & 26 $\pm$ 8 & 1.28 $\pm$ 0.40 &
3850: 5.45 $\pm$ 0.03 & 424 $\pm$ 131 \\
3851: VV 114(east) & 306 $\pm$ 3 & 0.618 & 13 $\pm$ 4 & 0.438 $\pm$ 0.135 & 0.989 $\pm$ 0.010 & 226 $\pm$ 70 \\
3852: VV 114(center) & 223 $\pm$ 3 & 0.450 & 13 $\pm$ 4 & 0.438 $\pm$ 0.135 & 0.721 $\pm$ 0.010 & 165 $\pm$ 51 \\
3853: VV 114(west) & 145 $\pm$ 3 & 0.293 & $<$ 8 $\pm$ 4 & $<$ 0.269 $\pm$ 0.134 & 0.469 $\pm$ 0.010 & $>$ 174 $\pm$ 87 \\
3854: NGC 5331N & 48 $\pm$ 5 & 0.266 & $<$ 12 $\pm$ 6 & $<$ 1.45 $\pm$
3855: 0.73 & 0.425 $\pm$ 0.044 & $>$ 29 $\pm$ 15 \\
3856: NGC 5331S & 127 $\pm$ 6 & 0.704 & 27 $\pm$ 6 & 3.27 $\pm$ 0.73 & 1.13 $\pm$
3857: 0.05 & 34 $\pm$ 8 \\
3858: NGC 2623 & 430 $\pm$ 1.3 & 0.735 & 50 $\pm$ 2 & 1.40 $\pm$ 0.06 &
3859: 1.177 $\pm$ 0.004 & 84 $\pm$ 3 \\
3860: NGC 5257 & 97 $\pm$ 11 & 0.253 & $<$ 26 $\pm$ 13 & $<$ 1.27 $\pm$
3861: 0.63 & 0.405 $\pm$ 0.046 & $>$ 32 $\pm$ 16 \\
3862: NGC 5258 & 60 $\pm$ 10 & 0.157 & $<$ 30 $\pm$ 15 & $<$ 1.46 $\pm$ 0.73 &
3863: 0.250 $\pm$ 0.042 & $>$ 17 $\pm$ 9 \\
3864: NGC 1614 & 275 $\pm$ 4 & 0.351 & 21 $\pm$ 4 & 0.243 $\pm$ 0.046\tablenotemark{e} & 0.561 $\pm$ 0.008 & 231 $\pm$ 44\tablenotemark{e} \\
3865: \enddata
3866: \tablenotetext{a}{Values measured at the peak emission except for
3867: NGC 5258, where it is measured at the peak in the nuclear region. See Table~\ref{tbl-obs}
3868: for the beam size for each galaxy.}
3869: \tablenotetext{b}{$M_{\rm H_2}$ and $M_{dust}$ are calculated with
3870: the same assumptions and dust temperature used in Table~\ref{tbl-dustmass}.}
3871: \tablenotetext{c}{Dust mass and gas-to-dust ratio have been corrected
3872: by a factor of 0.75 to account for a non-thermal contribution
3873: to the 880 $\mu$m flux. See text.}
3874: \tablenotetext{dd}{There may be an non-thermal contribution to the
3875: continuum flux of this source; however, any effect on the dust
3876: mass and the gas-to-dust ratio is likely smaller than the
3877: uncertaintites. See text.}
3878: \tablenotetext{e}{Dust mass and gas-to-dust ratio have been corrected
3879: by a factor of 0.6 to account for a possible non-thermal contribution
3880: to the 880 $\mu$m flux. See text.}
3881: % Aug 10, 2007: decided to use 60% as correction for N1614 both
3882: % integrated and peak
3883: \end{deluxetable}
3884:
3885:
3886: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
3887: %%% old single dish table below here
3888: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
3889:
3890: %%% TABLE 9
3891:
3892:
3893: \begin{deluxetable}{lccccccc}
3894: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
3895: \tablecaption{\bf Single Dish 800/850 $\mu$m continuum fluxes and
3896: CO 3-2 line contamination factors
3897: \label{tbl-cont-native}}
3898: \tablewidth{0pt}
3899: \tablehead{
3900: \colhead{Galaxy} & \colhead{JCMT flux\tablenotemark{a}} %& \colhead{CO3-2}
3901: & \colhead{CO3-2\tablenotemark{b}} & \colhead{SMA flux}
3902: & \colhead{Missing Flux\tablenotemark{c}} & \colhead{Percent\tablenotemark{c}}\\
3903: & \colhead{(mJy)} %& \colhead{(Jy km s$^{-1}$)}
3904: & \colhead{(mJy)} & \colhead{(mJy)}
3905: & \colhead{(mJy)} & \colhead{missing flux}
3906: }
3907: \startdata
3908: 17208-0014 & 155 $\pm$ 47 %& 985 $\pm$ 128
3909: & 18.9 \\
3910: Mrk 231 & 96$\pm$18 %& 480$\pm$100
3911: & 9.2 \\
3912: Mrk 273 & 84$\pm$22 %& 441$\pm$ 14
3913: & 8.4 \\
3914: 10565+2448 & 61$\pm$13 %& 470$\pm$60
3915: & 9.0 \\
3916: UGC 5101 & 143$\pm$25 %& 490$\pm$80
3917: & 9.4 \\
3918: Arp 299 & 425 $\pm$ 8 %& 4890$\pm$180
3919: & 93.7 \\
3920: Arp 55 & 65$\pm$13 %& $\ge$ 425 $\pm$ 40
3921: & $\ge$ 8.1 \\
3922: Arp 193 & 113 $\pm$ 15 %& 1118 $\pm$ 95
3923: & 21.4 \\
3924: NGC 6240 & 150 $\pm$ 45 % 3205 $\pm$ 642
3925: & 61.4 \\
3926: VV 114 & 205 $\pm$ 8 %& 2956 $\pm$ 133
3927: & 56.7 \\
3928: NGC 5331 & 72 $\pm$ 7 %& 307 $\pm$ 24
3929: & 9.2 \\
3930: NGC 2623 & 91 $\pm$ 14 %& 620 $\pm$ 44
3931: & 11.9 \\
3932: NGC 5257 & 114 $\pm$ 23 %& 437 $\pm$ 67
3933: & 8.4 \\
3934: NGC 5258 & 169 $\pm$ 32 %& 504 $\pm$ 10
3935: & 9.7 \\
3936: NGC 1614 & 219 $\pm$ 32 %& 1471 $\pm$ 62
3937: & 28.2 \\
3938: \enddata
3939: \tablenotetext{a}{See text discussion of Table 5 for a description of
3940: the source of the
3941: uncertainty listed here for each galaxy. These fluxes are at their
3942: native wavelength, either 850 or 800 microns.}
3943: \tablenotetext{b}{SMA CO J=3-2 fluxes used for Mrk 273 and NGC 5331.
3944: Arp 55 flux is likely underestimated since spectrum was centered near the
3945: south-western source and so misses most emission from the stronger
3946: north-eastern source.}
3947: \end{deluxetable}
3948:
3949:
3950:
3951: